Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09202022 - 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 KAREN MITCHOFF, CHAIR, 4TH DISTRICT FEDERAL D. GLOVER, VICE CHAIR, 5TH DISTRICT JOHN GIOIA, 1ST DISTRICT CANDACE ANDERSEN, 2ND DISTRICT DIANE BURGIS, 3RD 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. The Board meeting will be accessible in-person, via television, and via live-streaming to all members of the public. 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 on the agenda may comment in person or may call in during the meeting by dialing 888-278-0254 followed by the access code 843298#. A caller should indicate they wish to speak on an agenda item, by pushing "#2" on their phone. Access via Zoom is also available using the following link: https://cccounty-us.zoom.us/j/87344719204 . Those participating via Zoom should indicate they wish to speak on an agenda item by using the “raise your hand” feature in the Zoom app. To provide contact information, please contact Clerk of the Board at clerkoftheboard@cob.cccounty.us or call 925-655-2000. Meetings of the Board are closed-captioned in real time. Public comment generally will be limited to two minutes. Your patience is appreciated. A Spanish language interpreter is available to assist Spanish-speaking callers. 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 online at www.contracosta.ca.gov. ANNOTATED AGENDA & MINUTES September 20, 2022            9:00 A.M. Convene, call to order and opening ceremonies. Closed Session A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Gov. Code § 54957.6) 1. Agency Negotiators: Monica Nino. Employee Organizations: 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; and Teamsters Local 856. 2. Agency Negotiators: Monica Nino. Unrepresented Employees: All unrepresented employees. B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL--EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1)) Kellie Smith v. County of Contra Costa, Contra Costa Superior Court Case No. C21-007121. Robin Stumps v. Contra Costa County; Contra Costa Superior Court Case No. MSC19-022812. C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL--ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Gov. Code, § 54956.9(d)(2): [One potential case.] Claim of Peter Fogarty1. Present: John Gioia, District I Supervisor; Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor; Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor; Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Absent: Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Staff Present:Monica Nino, County Administrator Mary Ann McNett Mason, County Counsel  Speakers in support of wage increases for In-Home Support Services (IHSS) workers;Speakers in support of wage increases for In-Home Support Services (IHSS) workers; Richard Lengrel,SEIU 2015; Mary Rocha, SEIU 2015 Tracy Lay, SEIU 2015 Todd; Claire Sese Zachary, SEIU 2015 Shannon Stotts, SEIU 2015;Judy Jackson; Marissa; Loreen Lober; Constance Barker; Keegan Duncan.   CS.1A Claim (without attachments)     Inspirational Thought- "Autumn leaves don't fall, they fly. They take their time and wander on this their only chance to soar." ~Delia Owens, author   CONSIDER CONSENT ITEMS (Items listed as C.1 through C.81 on the following agenda) – Items are subject to removal from Consent Calendar by request of any Supervisor or on request for discussion by a member of the public. Items removed from the Consent Calendar will be considered with the Discussion Items.   PRESENTATIONS (5 Minutes Each)   PRESENTATION proclaiming September 2022 Intergenerational Month. (Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director)   PRESENTATION proclaiming September 2022 as National Recovery Month in Contra Costa County. (Supervisor Glover)   PRESENTATION honoring County employees for their many years of service to Contra Costa County: Christopher Verdugo, for his 30 years of service with the Office of Communication and Media, to be presented by Susan Shiu.    Speaker: Chai Chai Not the Bully.   DISCUSSION ITEMS   D.1 CONSIDER adopting Resolution No. 2022/332, allocating Measure X funds to Contra Costa County Fire Protection District through June 30, 2028, for the provision of fire protection services within the service area of the former East Contra Costa Fire Protection District and within the cities of Antioch and Pinole. (Adam Nguyen, Finance Director)       Speakers: Caller 6770; Jan Warren; No name given;  Speakers: Caller 6770; Jan Warren; No name given; ADOPTED Resolution No. 2022/332, allocating Measure X funds to Contra Costa County Fire Protection District through June 30, 2028, for the provision of fire protection services within the service area of the former East Contra Costa Fire Protection District and within the cities of Antioch and Pinole; and DIRECTED that staff will have flexibility to negotiate any final language changes with the city of Pinole on this issue.   D.2 CONSIDER providing direction on renaming Kirker Pass Road (Road No. 5261) between the Pittsburg city limits and Concord city limits, and provide direction on continuing the renaming process either with or without the concurrence of the cities of Pittsburg, Concord, and Clayton, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Pittsburg and Concord areas.(Monish Sen, Public Works Department)       Speakers: Chi Chi. No specific name has been chosen for the relevant sections of road. The Board and Public Works concurred that the most logical would be to extend the names Railroad Avenue and Ygnacio Valley road in the appropriate sections, but will seek input from the public and cities. Public works will continue to move forward with a name change within that area of Kirker Pass Road with the incorporated county and continue to work with the City of Pittsburg to determine if they wish to rename the portion of the road within the city.   D.3 RECEIVE report of the Interdepartmental Climate Action Task Force, as recommended by the Directors of the Departments of Conservation and Development and Public Works. (Jody London, Conservation and Development Department)       Speakers: Chi Chi; Caller 6770.    AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) D.4 ACCEPT report on preparatory work related to the Measure X Housing Fund and the $10 million available in year one; CONSIDER authorizing staff to proceed with requests for proposals for various affordable housing and homelessness prevention and crisis response projects. (John Kopchik, Department of Conservation and Development; Lavonna Martin, Contra Costa Health Services; and Joseph Villarreal, Housing Authority of Contra Costa County)       Speakers: Logan Campbell, Recovery community; Chi Chi; Caller 6770;; Noah; Todd; Max Henninger, Eden Housing; Kristi, Raise the Roof Coalition, East Bay Alliance for an Affordable Economy; Sara; Ellen; Jackie, Antioch; James Daniels, Pinole. Written commentary provided by Rachel Rosekind (attached)   D.5 RECEIVE update and provide direction to staff regarding Juvenile Justice Programs, Facilities and Mandates in Contra Costa County. (Esa Ehmen-Krause, Chief Probation Officer)       Speakers: Chi Chi; No name given. Written correspondence received from Lynn Mackey, Superintendent of Schools (attached). ACCEPTED the report; and DIRECTED the County Probation Officer to return to the Board on October 25, 2022 with recommendations on the possible closure of the Orin Allen Youth Facility.   D.6 CONSIDER adopting the Capital Facilities Master Plan 2022 (CFMP 2022) outlining the 20-year vision for transforming County facilities to support improved customer service delivery, improve support for County employees providing those services and to guide future capital facilities budgeting and planning decisions. (Eric Angstadt, Chief Assistant County Administrator)       Speakers: No name given. Written correspondence received from Lisa Kirk (attached).    AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) D.7 CONSIDER electing 2023 officers of the Board of Supervisors. (Supervisor Mitchoff)      Speakers: No name given. ELECTED Supervisor John Gioia as Chair for 2023; and ELECTED Supervisor Federal D. Glover to continue to serve as Vice-Chair.   D. 8 CONSIDER Consent Items previously removed.    Consent items C.10 and C.80 were set aside to allow for public commentary and subsequently adopted as presented.   D. 9 PUBLIC COMMENT (2 Minutes/Speaker)    Casimir Karbo, Captain, CCC Fire Protection District thanked the Board for taking the time to review the mandatory testing policy regarding Covid-19 and easing the restrictions for employees; Renee Zimer, informed of the Not Above the Law Coalition. The organization is made up of 150 state and local largely nonpartisan organizations including Common Cause, Common Defense, Citizens for Ethics and Republican Accountability Project. Ms. Rimer requests the support of the Board for a resolution committing to free and fair elections in the peaceful transfer of power; Chair Mitchoff's office will assist in placing a resolution on the Board's agenda No Name Given believes that in order to have a fair election we must eliminate mail-in ballot and count of all ballots must be done the night of the election; Stephanie thanked all the Supervisors for their service on many diverse issues while providing transparency. She believes Measure X to be a regressive tax and should be considered carefully before being used to fund programs for the most vulnerable members of the community; Caller 6770 expressed concerns with alleged ballot stuffing, electronic tallying of votes and the written language on ballots.   D. 10 CONSIDER reports of Board members.    There were no items reported today.   Adjourn in memory of Debra Hanschar Ombudsman Program Manager for Empowered Aging     Adjourned today's meeting at 2:54 p.m.   CONSENT ITEMS   Road and Transportation   C. 1 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Fehr & Peers in an amount not to exceed $250,000 to provide on-call transportation engineering services for the period September 20, 2022 through September 19, 2025, Countywide. (100% Developer Fees, Local Road and other Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 2 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with T J K M (dba TJKM Transportation Consultants) in an amount not to exceed $250,000 to provide on-call transportation engineering services for the period September 20, 2022 through September 19, 2025, Countywide. (100% Developer Fees, Local Road and other Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 3 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Wood Rodgers, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $250,000 to provide on-call transportation engineering services for the period September 20, 2022 through September 19, 2025, Countywide. (100% Developer Fees, Local Road and other Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 4 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. (dba W-Trans) in an amount not to exceed $250,000 to provide on-call transportation engineering services for the period September 20, 2022 through September 19, 2025, Countywide. (100% Developer Fees, Local Road and other Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Engineering Services   C. 5 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/310 accepting for recording purposes only an Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes for minor subdivision MS14-00001, for a project being developed by Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated July 17, 1991, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Walnut Creek area. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 6 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/312 approving the Parcel Map for minor subdivision MS14-00001, for a project being developed by Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated July 17, 1991, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Walnut Creek area. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 7 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/313 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute the Deferred Improvement Agreement for minor subdivision MS-00001, for a project being developed by Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated July 17, 1991, Walnut Creek area. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 8 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/318 accepting completion of the warranty period for the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) and release of cash deposit for park acceptance PA14-00042, for a project developed by Toll Brothers, Inc., as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (100% Developer Fees)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 9 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/319 accepting completion of the Agreement for Improvement Warranty and release of cash deposit for park acceptance PA15-00044, for a project developed by Shapell Industries, Inc., as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (100% Developer Fees)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Special Districts & County Airports   C. 10 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to execute a contract amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with KSA Engineers, Inc. to add an additional subconsultant to update the Airport Division’s disadvantaged business enterprise program. (100% Airport Enterprise Funds)       Speaker: No name given.    AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Claims, Collections & Litigation   C. 11 DENY the claims filed by T-Mobile West LLC, Sprint Telephony PCS, LP, Sprint Communications Company, LP, SFPP, L.P., and Lumen Technologies (formerly Level 3 Communications, LLC) in the total amount of $696,332.28, plus interest, in unitary property taxes paid for tax year 2017/18. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 12 DENY claims filed by Beatriz Adriana Cardenas, Ezekiel Johnson, Ean D. Prado-Rodriguez and Mark and Mary Shepherd (3).       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen  AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Statutory Actions   C. 13 ACCEPT Board members meeting reports for August 2022.      AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Honors & Proclamations   C. 14 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/308 honoring Rusty Keilch for her many years of service to Contra Costa County upon her retirement, as recommended by the Health Services Director.       Speakers: Erika Jensen, Deputy Director, Contra Costa Health Services.    AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 15 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/323 recognizing Al Kalin for his outstanding achievements to promote and ensure safe cycling, as recommended by Supervisor Andersen.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 16 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/328 proclaiming September 2022 Intergenerational Month, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 17 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/327 recognizing Jay Lifson upon his retirement from the Lafayette Chamber of Commerce, as recommended by Supervisor Andersen.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 18 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/330 proclaiming September 2022 as National Recovery Month in Contra Costa County, as recommended by Supervisors Glover.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Ordinances   C. 19 ADOPT Ordinance No. 2022-32, an ordinance amending the County’s Better Government Ordinance to remove subdivision (e) of Section 25-4.404 regarding attorney-client communications. (Fiscal impact unknown)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Appointments & Resignations   C. 20 REAPPOINT Allan Tobias to the District IV seat on the Emergency Medical Care Committee for a term ending September 30, 2024, as recommended by Supervisor Mitchoff.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 21 APPOINT Dulce Galicia to the North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council Representative 1 Seat on the North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee Committee, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 22 APPOINT Darien Key to the Public at Large seat on the Local Enforcement Agency Independent Hearing Panel to a term that will expire on March 31, 2026, as recommended by the Internal Operations Committee.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 23 ESTABLISH a seven-member Ad Hoc Arts Council Steering Committee, as recommended by the Internal Operations Committee.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Personnel Actions   C. 24 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26025 to add one Administrative Services Assistant II-Project (represented) position in the Health Services Department. (50% Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 50% American Rescue Plan Act)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 25 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26026 to add one Registered Health Information Technologist (represented) position in the Health Services Department. (100% Mental Health Realignment)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 26 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26022 to add one full-time Administrative Services Assistant II (represented) position and cancel one full-time Assistant County Counsel (unrepresented) position in the Office of the County Counsel. (100% Salary Savings)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 27 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26029 to add one Clerical Supervisor (represented) position and cancel two Clerk-Senior Level (represented) positions in the Health Services Department. (Cost savings, Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 28 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26028 to add one Public Health Program Specialist II (represented) position, one Medical Interpreter (represented) position, and one Buyer II (represented) position in the Health Services Department. (40% Birth and Death Certificate Program, 33% Public Health Workforce Development Grant, and 27% Refugee Health Assessment Program Grant)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 29 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26027 to add one Administrative Aide, one Infection Prevention and Control Manager, two Disease Intervention Technician, three Clerk - Senior Level, two Public Health Program Specialist I, two Administrative Services Assistant II, one Health Services Systems Analyst II position, one Planner and Evaluator - Level B position, and one Public Health Program Specialist II represented positions, and one unrepresented Departmental Human Resources Analyst II position in the Health Services Department. (100% Public Health State Funding)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 30 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26031 reallocating Human Resources Analyst (AGTF) (unrepresented) and the Employee Benefits Analyst (AGVG) (unrepresented) classifications on the salary schedule at salary plan and grade B85 1631 ($7,433 - $10,982); all incumbent employees in these classes remain in the step that equals current compensation rate, as recommended by the Director of Human Resources. (100% General Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Grants & Contracts   APPROVE and AUTHORIZE execution of agreements between the County and the following agencies for receipt of fund and/or services:   C. 31 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/322 authorizing the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to    C. 31 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/322 authorizing the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to apply for and execute a contract to accept State of California Emergency Solutions Grant funds in an amount not to exceed $557,286 for eligible activities to assist homeless individuals and families with services to regain permanent housing, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director. (100% Federal, no County match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 32 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with the County of Alameda, to pay the County an amount up to $1,969,611 for coordination of essential services to Contra Costa County residents with HIV disease and their families for the period March 1, 2022 through February 28, 2023. (No County match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 33 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/329 approving and authorizing the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an agreement with the State of California Health and Human Services Agency, Department of Community Services and Development, in an amount not to exceed $125,000 for Department of Energy, Weatherization Assistance Program services, for the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023. (100% Federal)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 34 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to apply for and accept grant funding from the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, Victim Services Branch, in an amount not to exceed $383,328 to bridge the gap in services addressing Elder Abuse for the period January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023. (100% Federal)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 35 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/321 approving and authorizing the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to accept funding from, and execute an agreement with, the California Department of Aging, in an amount not to exceed $72,301 to provide Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act services for the period September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2023. (100% Federal; No County Match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 36 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/320 approving and authoring the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to apply for and accept grant funding from the California Department of Aging in an amount not to exceed $1,222,039 for the Home and Community Based Services Senior Nutrition Infrastructure grant program for the period of July 1, 2022 through December 31, 2024. (100% State)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 37 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Agricultural Commissioner, or designee, to execute an agreement with the    C. 37 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Agricultural Commissioner, or designee, to execute an agreement with the California Department of Food and Agriculture to reimburse the County an amount not to exceed $329,785 to perform pest exclusion and high-risk pest inspection and enforcement activities for the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023. (100% State funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 38 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Public Health Institute, to pay the County an amount up to $120,000 for the County’s Choosing Change program to provide a Substance Use Navigator to connect patients with Opioid Use Disorder to treatment programs for the period September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2023. (No County match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 39 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Bay Alarm Company, in the amount of $67,000 for scholarships, classes, and recruitment for the Law Enforcement Training Center for the period January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2022, with the Sheriff’s Charities, Inc., serving as the fiscal agent.(100% Donation Revenue)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 40 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to apply for and accept grant funding from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Head Start, in an amount not to exceed $27,553,039 for Head Start and Early Head Start Program services for the period January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023. (100% Federal)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) APPROVE and AUTHORIZE execution of agreement between the County and the following parties as noted for the purchase of equipment and/or services:   C. 41 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Health Services Department, to purchase 20 Amazon gift cards each with a $100 value totaling $2,000, 100 Target gift cards each with a $50 value and 75 each with a $5 value totaling $5,375, 75 Safeway gift cards each with a $25 value and 75 each with a $10 value totaling $2,625, the total amount not to exceed $10,000 for the Building Healthy Communities Program from September 1, 2022 through December 31, 2023. (40% Kaiser Parks After Dark Grant, 30% Walk and Bike Leaders for Clean Air Grant, 20% CDC Social Determinants of Health Accelerator Plan Grant,10% Transportation Development Act Grant)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 42 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions), in an amount not to exceed $1,540,866 to provide case management and housing navigation services to homeless individuals on probation for the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023. (100% Probation Department)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 43 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a novation contract with Mountain Valley Child and Family Services, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,400,000 to provide mental health services for the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, including a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2023 in an amount not to exceed $700,000. (50% Federal Medi-Cal, 46% Mental Health Realignment, 4% Measure X)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 44 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with The Tides Center, to extend the term through March 31, 2023 with no change in the contract payment limit to continue to act as fiscal sponsor for Building Blocks for Kids and support the development of the Contra Costa Health Services Doula Program which provides community support through the prenatal, birth and postpartum period. (100% California Department of Public Health)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 45 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Health Services Department, to purchase 150 Starbucks gift cards each with a $10 value, totaling $1,500, 25 Jamba Juice gift cards each with a $10 value, totaling $250, and 25 Baskin Robins gift cards each with a $10 value, totaling $250, the total amount not to exceed $2,000 for the Tobacco Prevention Program to distribute to community members who participate in completing a population intercept survey from September 1, 2022 through March 31, 2023. (100% California Department of Public Health Local Lead Agencies Grant)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 46 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, to execute on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Inc. in the amount of $435,000 for the purchase of reagents and supplies as needed for the Blood Bank Laboratory at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center for the period September 1, 2022, to August 31, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 47 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services Department, a purchase order with UpToDate, Inc. in the amount of $645,000 for the licensed content of drug-disease databases; and APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute an contract amendment with UpToDate, Inc. to renew the contract term to September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 48 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services    C. 48 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services Department, a purchase order with Steris Corporation in an amount not to exceed $800,000 for the purchase of Steris agents, filters, solutions, and other medical items as needed for the Operating Room at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center, for the period September 1, 2022, through August 31, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 49 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Emocha Mobile Health, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $160,200 to provide contractor-hosted tuberculosis monitoring software system services for patients to track laboratory measurements via a mobile app for the period May 1, 2022 through April 30, 2027. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 50 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services Department, a purchase order amendment with Clear Labs, Inc., to extend the term through July 31, 2024, to continue purchasing testing reagents and kits for SARS-CoV-2 and other pandemic virus whole genome sequencing, with no change to the payment limit. (100% CDC Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity COVID-19 ELC Enhancing Detection Expansion grant)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 51 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a novation contract with Seneca Family of Agencies, in an amount not to exceed $7,655,806 to provide school and community-based wraparound specialty mental health services and therapeutic behavioral services for seriously emotionally disturbed children and their families in Contra Costa County for the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, including a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2023 in an amount not to exceed $3,827,903. (50% Federal Medi-Cal; 41.5% Mental Health Realignment; 4.7% Measure X Funds; 2.4% Martinez/West Contra Costa Unified School District Grants; 1% Probation Department Wrap Match; .3% West Contra Costa Unified School District Grant)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 52 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Public Works Department, a blanket purchase order with Ray Morgan Company in the amount of $450,000 for a Canon Vario Print 6180TP Press for County departments' printing needs, for the period October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027, Countywide. (100% User Departments)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 53 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Mesa Laboratories, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $524,306 to provide a hosted software system for Mesa Lab’s equipment, room, temperature, and humidity monitoring system for the period September 20, 2022 through September 19, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 54 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with S/T Health Group Consulting, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide pharmacy benefit manager audit services at Contra Costa Health Plan for the period October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2023. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 55 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Debri-Tech, Inc. (dba Rapid Recycle) in an amount not to exceed $2,000,000 to provide on-call trash and abandoned waste cleanup and removal services on various County roads for the Contra Costa County Watershed Program, for the period of October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2025, Countywide. (100% Stormwater Utility Assessment Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 56 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Sheriff-Coroner, a purchase order amendment with Adamson Police Products to extend the termination date from October 1, 2022 to September 30, 2025, with no change to the payment limit for the purchase of tactical & protective gear and clothing and other products. (100% General Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 57 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with David L. Gates & Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $500,000 to provide on-call landscape architect services for the period October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2025, Countywide. (100% Special Revenue Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 58 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Stantec Consulting Services Inc., in an amount not to exceed $500,000 to provide on-call landscape architect services for the period October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2025, Countywide. (100% Special Revenue Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 59 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Albert S. Dutchover (dba Dutchover & Associates Landscape Architect) in an amount not to exceed $500,000 to provide on-call landscape architect services for the period October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2025, Countywide. (100% Special Revenue Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 60 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services    C. 60 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services Department, a purchase order with Polymedco, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,200,000 to purchase reagents and supplies to perform immunochemical fecal occult blood testing for the Clinical Laboratory at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center for the period October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 61 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Defender, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Rubicon Programs, Inc. to extend the term from September 30, 2022 through March 31, 2023 and increase the payment limit by $204,971 to a new payment limit of $510,671 to provide client services in Contra Costa County for Holistic Intervention Partnership participants. (100% State)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 62 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Periscope Holdings, Inc., to increase the payment limit by $55,000 to a new payment limit of $485,767 to provide additional reporting capabilities, with no change to the contract term, Countywide. (100% General Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 63 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Monument Crisis Center in an amount not to exceed $250,000 to augment programs for meal delivery, social services, job training and education and for referrals for services provided by other organizations to families and individuals in crisis situations for the period October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027, as recommended by Supervisor Mitchoff. (100% Livable Communities Trust Fund, District IV share)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 64 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Flock Group, Inc., on behalf of Office of the Sheriff, effective October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2024 in an amount not to exceed $70,200 for the acquisition and installation of automatic license plate reader cameras and software for County Service Area P-2B Alamo. (No County Cost; 100% CSA P-2B Alamo Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 65 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Flock Group Inc., on behalf of the Office of the Sheriff, effective October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2024 in an amount not to exceed $35,100 for the acquisition and installation of automatic license plate reader cameras and software for County Service Area P-5. (No County Cost; 100% CSA P-5 Round Hill funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 66 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with the    C. 66 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, in an amount not to exceed $5,376,369 to provide standardized paramedic level emergency medical first responder services in coordination with the Contra Costa County Emergency Medical System for the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2025. (100% County Service Area EM-1 Measure H funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 67 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Specialty Laboratories, Inc. (dba Quest Diagnostic Nichols Institute), to modify the rate schedule to include additional outside laboratory testing services for the Monkey Pox virus with no change to the payment limit or term through December 31, 2022. (71% Hospital Enterprise Fund I, 29% Federal Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic Security Act)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 68 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment agreement with Nazar Mohammad Aryaei (DBA AA Cab Company), effective September 1, 2022, to increase the payment limit by $200,000 to a new payment limit of $500,000 for non-medical transportation services for Contra Costa Health Plan members with no change in the term October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2022. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 69 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with West Contra Costa Unified School District, in an amount not to exceed $749,268 to provide wraparound services to severely emotionally disturbed children in West Contra Costa County for the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, including a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2023 in an amount not to exceed $374,634. (50% Mental Health Realignment, 39% Federal Medi-Cal, 10% Measure X Fund, 1% West Contra Costa Unified School District)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Other Actions   C. 70 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with the City of Brentwood, to allow the Health Services Department and the California Department of Public Health contractors to continue using the City’s Brentwood Technology and Education Center for COVID-19 testing and immunizations through December 31, 2022. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 71 CONTINUE the emergency action originally taken by the Board of Supervisors on November 16, 1999, and most recently approved by the Board on July 26, 2022 regarding the issue of homelessness in Contra Costa County, as recommended by the Health Services Director. (No fiscal impact)         AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 72 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/270 authorizing revised operating hours for Contra Costa County Library branches from the hours approved under Resolution No. 2021/110 on March 30, 2021, to increase the County-funded base hours open to the public from 35 to 40 hours per week and update additional City-funded hours for selected branches. (Library fund and city revenues)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 73 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director to submit the County's FY 2021/22 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for the following federal programs: Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnership Act, Emergency Solutions Grant, Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS, and Neighborhood Stabilization Program. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 74 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/314, which establishes retirement plan contribution rates as approved by the Retirement Board for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024, as recommended by the County Administrator.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 75 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to renew Cardroom License Number 6, known as "California Grand Casino" currently located at 5988 Pacheco Blvd., Pacheco, California, for the period of November 26, 2022 through November 25, 2023. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 76 ACCEPT the 2021 Quarter 3 and Quarter 4 reports from the Council on Homelessness, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 77 ACCEPT the Health Services Department's Public Health Division reports on Family and Human Services Referral Nos. 118 Policy Options for Protecting Youth from Tobacco Influences in the Retail Environment and 82 Secondhand Smoke Protections Ordinance, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 78 ACCEPT the annual report and presentation on the Homeless Continuum of Care from the Health, Housing    C. 78 ACCEPT the annual report and presentation on the Homeless Continuum of Care from the Health, Housing and Homeless Services Division of the Health Services Department, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 79 ACCEPT the Health Care for the Homeless annual update report and presentation, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 80 ACCEPT the 2022 report on Family Justice Centers and Commercially Sexually Exploited Children and accompanying presentation, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. (No fiscal impact)       Speakers: Caller 6770; No name given.    AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 81 ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/375 adopting the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Adopted Budget as finally determined, as recommended by the County Administrator.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT)   GENERAL INFORMATION 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. Anyone desiring to submit an inspirational thought nomination for inclusion on the Board Agenda may contact 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 STANDING COMMITTEES The Airport Committee (Supervisors Karen Mitchoff and Diane Burgis) meets quarterly on the second Wednesday of the month at 11:00 a.m. at the Director of Airports Office, 550 Sally Ride Drive, Concord. The Family and Human Services Committee (Supervisors John Gioia and Candace Andersen) meets on the fourth Monday of the month at 9:00 a.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. The Finance Committee (Supervisors John Gioia and Karen Mitchoff) meets on the first Monday of the month at 9:00 a.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. The Hiring Outreach Oversight Committee (Supervisors Federal D. Glover and John Gioia) meets quarterly on the first Monday of the month at 10:30 a.m.. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. The Internal Operations Committee (Supervisors Candace Andersen and Diane Burgis) meets on the second Monday of the month at 10:30 a.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. The Legislation Committee (Supervisors Karen Mitchoff and Diane Burgis) meets on the second Monday of the month at 1:00 p.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Street, Martinez. The Public Protection Committee (Supervisors Andersen and Federal D. Glover) meets on the fourth Monday of the month at 10:30 a.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. The Sustainability Committee (Supervisors Federal D. Glover and John Gioia) meets on the fourth Monday of every other month at 1:00 p.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. The Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee (Supervisors Candace Andersen and Karen Mitchoff) meets on the second Monday of the month at 9:00 a.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. 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): See attached claim FISCAL IMPACT: See attached document BACKGROUND: See attached document CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: * APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS Contact: County Counsel I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: , Deputy cc: CS.1A To:Board of Supervisors From: Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Claim for Peter R. Fogarty ATTACHMENTS Claim 22-64 Redacted RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/332, allocating Measure X funds to Contra Costa County Fire Protection District through June 30, 2028, for the provision of fire protection services within the service area of the former East Contra Costa Fire Protection District and within the cities of Antioch and Pinole. FISCAL IMPACT: The Board of Supervisors has allocated Measure X funds totaling $9.0 million annually through FY 2023/24 for the provision of fire protection services by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD). $3.5 million has been allocated for fire protection services within the service area of the former East Contra Costa Fire Protection District (ECCFPD), $3 million to reopen and staff CCCFPD’s Fire Station 81 located in the City of Antioch and $2 million for fire protection services within the City of Pinole (via a fire protection service agreement between CCCFPD and the City of Pinole). Today’s action would allocate Measure X funds of $9.0 million annually through FY 2027/28 for a total additional Measure X allocation of $36 million. With the inclusion of an annual adjustment for fire protection services provided in these three areas, the total additional allocation is $39.7 million, assuming a 4.0% annual increase through FY 2027/28. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS Contact: Paul Reyes 925.655.2049 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: , Deputy cc: D.1 To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Measure X Funding for Fire Protection Services FISCAL IMPACT: (CONT'D) BACKGROUND: On November 3, 2020, voters in Contra Costa County approved Measure X, a Countywide, 20-year, half-cent sales tax. The ballot measure language stated the intent of Measure X is “to keep Contra Costa’s regional hospital open and staffed; fund community health centers, emergency response; support crucial safety-net services; invest in early childhood services; protect vulnerable populations; and for other essential county services.” On November 16, 2021, the Board of Supervisors adopted a Measure X expenditure plan that included allocating annual funding of $9.0 million through June 30, 2024, for the provision of fire protection services. An annual allocation of $3.5 million was allocated to CCCFPD to support the operational costs related to the annexation of ECCFPD and the reopening of CCCFPD’s Fire Station 54 in the City of Brentwood. An annual allocation of $3.5 million has been allocated to CCCFPD to staff and reopen CCCFPD’s Fire Station 81 in the City of Antioch, which is within CCCFPD’s current service area. An annual amount of $2.0 million has been allocated to support the provision of fire protection services by CCCFPD to the City of Pinole, including the reopening of Pinole’s Fire Station 74, provided the parties enter into a fire protection service agreement. The potential fire protection service agreement between CCCFPD and the City of Pinole is still under negotiation and has the initial term ending June 30, 2028, with a provision for a 5-year extension. It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors adopt the attached resolution to allocate Measure X funds through June 30, 2028, for the provision of fire protection services by CCCFPD within the former ECCFPD service area and within the cities of Antioch and Pinole. If the agreement with the City of Pinole is extended, the Board of Supervisors may allocate additional funds over the life of the extended agreement. The recommended allocation of Measure X funds for fire protection services includes an annual adjustment to offset increases in the operating costs of the funded programs. It is recommended that, beginning with Fiscal Year 2023/24, the allocations be adjusted annually by the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index-All Urban Consumers for the San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward Area for the twelve-month period ending with the February index of the calendar year in which the adjustment is made, but not to exceed 4 percent per year. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: An allocation of Measure X funds beyond FY 2023/24 would not be made which would result in an increased level of uncertainty in long-term fiscal planning. CLERK'S ADDENDUM Speakers: Caller 6770; Jan Warren; No name given; ADOPTED Resolution No. 2022/332, allocating Measure X funds to Contra Costa County Fire Protection District through June 30, 2028, for the provision of fire protection services within the service area of the former East Contra Costa Fire Protection District and within the cities of Antioch and Pinole; and DIRECTED that staff will have flexibility to negotiate any final language changes with the city of Pinole on this issue. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2022/332 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2022/332 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 09/20/2022 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2022/332 In the Matter of: Allocating Measure X Funds for Ongoing Fire Protection Services WHEREAS on November 3, 2020, voters in Contra Costa County approved Measure X, a Countywide, 20-year, half-cent sales tax with the intent “to keep Contra Costa’s regional hospital open and staffed; fund community health centers, emergency response; support crucial safety-net services; invest in early childhood services; protect vulnerable populations; and for other essential county services.”; WHEREAS on November 16, 2021, the Board of Supervisors adopted a Measure X expenditure allocation plan that included annual funding of $9.0 million through June 30, 2024, for the provision of fire protection services in the service area of the former East Contra Costa Fire Protection District and in the cities of Antioch and Pinole; WHEREAS the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (District) and the City of Pinole intend to leverage Measure X funds for an increased level of fire protection services in the City of Pinole; WHEREAS the Board of Supervisors acknowledge the ongoing funding needs of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District beyond the initial allocation through June 30, 2024, to support the provision of fire protection services by the District in the service area of the former East Contra Costa Fire Protection District and in the cities of Antioch and Pinole; and WHEREAS the Board of Supervisors acknowledge that increased funding allocations are necessary to maintain service levels and to offset annual increases in the operating costs of funded programs. NOW THEREFORE, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors resolves as follows: 1. The Board of Supervisors makes the following annual allocations of Measure X funds to the District through June 30, 2028: a. $2.0 million to support the provision of fire protection services, subject to the execution of a fire protection service agreement between the District and the City of Pinole. b. $3.5 million to support the provision of fire protection services in the service area of the former East Contra Costa Fire Protection District and the reopening of Fire Station 54 in the City of Brentwood. c. $3.5 million to support the provision of fire protection services in the District through the reopening of Fire Station 81 in the City of Antioch. 2. Beginning with Fiscal Year 2023/24, each of the above funding allocations will be adjusted annually by the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index-All Urban Consumers for the San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward Area for the twelve-month period ending with the February index of the calendar year in which the adjustment is made, but not to exceed 4 percent per year. Contact: Paul Reyes 925.655.2049 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: RECOMMENDATION(S): CONSIDER renaming of Kirker Pass Road (Road No. 5261) between the Pittsburg city limits and Concord city limits, and provide direction with the renaming process either with, or without, the concurrence from the City of Pittsburg, the City of Concord, and the City of Clayton, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Pittsburg and Concord areas. (Districts IV and V) FISCAL IMPACT: Costs are associated with staff time in preparing the documents for renaming the roadway, removal of existing signs and installation of replacement signs affected by the resolution. (100% General Fund - Unfunded Mandates) BACKGROUND: The proposal to change the name of Kirker Pass Road came forward as the public learned more about our history and re-evaluated place names and change, where appropriate. At the February 8, 2022 Board of Supervisors meeting, during public comment, a local historian presented documents discussing James Kirker, whom Kirker Pass Road is named after. His reputation was that of being a mercenary and leading attacks on indigenous people. In addition, there was an Op-Ed piece on James Kirker that ran in the San Francisco Chronicle on February 5, 2022. The Contra Costa County Public Works Department subsequently received a request from Contra Costa County Supervisors Karen Mitchoff and Federal Glover, to rename Kirker Pass Road, specifically that section of Kirker Pass Road within the area of the unincorporated County between the city limits of Pittsburg and Concord. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS Contact: Monish Sen, 925.313.2187 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: , Deputy cc: D.2 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Renaming of Kirker Pass Road, Pittsburg and Concord areas. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) On May 17, 2022, Transportation Engineering Staff notified the cities of Pittsburg, Concord, and Clayton of the County’s intention to rename the subject roadway and requested jurisdictional concurrence with the renaming of Kirker Pass Road. In preparation for a required Board Hearing to rename the County’s portion of Kirker Pass Road, County Transportation Engineering staff prepared cost estimates, assembled a mailing list of all parcels adjacent to Kirker Pass Road, drafted supporting documents required for the renaming, and submitted a review request to County Counsel of all pertinent documents. The City of Pittsburg Community Advisory Commission met on August 3, 2022 and received a presentation on the renaming of Kirker Pass Road. City of Pittsburg’s Engineering staff indicated they favor renaming the roadway to Railroad Avenue, in accordance with the County’s plan. On August 3, 2022, the City of Concord Policy Development and Internal Operations Committee met to discuss this issue. The committee determined that, without majority support from the impacted community, it would not move the process forward. The committee indicated that it would reconsider the effort if a majority of tenants and property owners impacted by a name change voiced their support. The City of Concord then informed the County of their intention to not pursue the renaming of Kirker Pass Road within their jurisdiction. The City of Clayton has not indicated support or opposition to the potential renaming of Kirker Pass Road. Although the roadway does not pass through the City of Clayton, there are properties in the City limits that currently have Kirker Pass Road addresses. The proposed renaming effort would impact those properties due to a change of street address. Given the City of Concord has determined that, at this time, they do not wish to move forward with this effort, and this will result in the road name remaining as Kirker Pass Road throughout the City of Concord’s jurisdiction, we ask the Board of Supervisors for direction on whether the County wishes to continue the renaming of Kirker Pass Road within the unincorporated County’s area at this time. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County will not pursue the renaming of the County’s section of Kirker Pass Road. CLERK'S ADDENDUM Speakers: Chi Chi. No specific name has been chosen for the relevant sections of road. The Board and Public Works concurred that the most logical would be to extend the names Railroad Avenue and Ygnacio Valley road in the appropriate sections, but will seek input from the public and cities. Public works will continue to move forward with a name change within that area of Kirker Pass Road with the incorporated county and continue to work with the City of Pittsburg to determine if they wish to rename the portion of the road within the city. RECOMMENDATION(S): RECEIVE report of the Interdepartmental Climate Action Task Force, as recommended by the Directors of the Departments of Conservation and Development and Public Works. FISCAL IMPACT: There are some new or increased costs, with offsetting savings. As County departments proceed with implementing recommendations from the Report, there could be both expenditures related to those activities and associated savings. For example, a department might choose to install LED lighting. There would be a cost associated with installing the new lights and, because the lights will use less energy, savings would accrue over time. BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors adopted a Climate Emergency Resolution (Resolution) on September 22, 2020. Among other things, the Resolution established an interdepartmental task force consisting of all Department heads, or their senior deputies, to coordinate their efforts focusing on the urgent implementation of the County’s Climate Action Plan. The Task Force was directed to report back to the Board of Supervisors (Board) twice a year as a discussion item on the Board agenda. In late 2020, the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) in partnership with the Department of Public Works (Public Works) convened the Task Force. Sustainability Fund Last year, the Task Force recommended that the Board establish a Sustainability Fund that can support investments in County infrastructure. In November 2021, the Board directed that $2.5 million per year be allocated from Measure X to support the Sustainability Fund. The first tranche of funds was received by the Public Works Department in April 2022 and is being used to install electric vehicle (EV) chargers at County facilities to expedite the conversion of the County’s fleet to zero emission vehicles. Attachment A, a presentation from the August 2022 Task Force meeting, reviews the process that Public Works is using to evaluate sites for EV chargers. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Jody London, 925-655-2815 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: D.3 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:RECEIVE report of the Interdepartmental Climate Action Task Force BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) G3 Champions Also in 2021, the Task Force agreed to support the Green Government Group (G3) Champions, employee volunteers who help their departments adopt best practices from the County’s Green Business Program. The G3 Champion program launched in April. Recruitment was aided by a video message from County Administrator Monica Nino (see https://youtu.be/uAMOiWwAUU8). Response from employees has been strong, with close to 70 people from nearly every department participating. A small, cross-department steering committee designs and facilitates the bi-monthly meetings of the G3 Champions and supports the Task Force. Attachment B is an update on the G3 Champion program that was provided at the August 2022 Task Force meeting. Each G3 Champion meeting and subsequent activity focuses on a different topic. The April launch meeting focused on Bike to Work Week. G3 Champions helped recruit County employees to participate in Bike to Work Week. The County’s Department of Conservation and Development had the highest percentage of employees participating. A survey of Bike to Work participants provided useful information on what would better support employees in bicycling to their offices. Suggestions include: more protected or separated bike lanes; secure bike parking spaces at County offices; lockers and showers at County offices. The June G3 Champion meeting focused on electric vehicles and included a presentation from Ride and Drive Clean about how electric vehicles operate, how to purchase them, etc. As the County increases the number of electric vehicles in its fleet, we need to make sure employees understand them and will drive them. The G3 Champions helped promote a Lunch and Learn webinar for all County employees on July 11 which reached maximum capacity of 100, with many more interested in attending. The G3 Champions also sponsored a survey of County employees about their interest in electric vehicles. Nearly 1,200 employees responded to the survey. The survey results show significant interest in electric vehicles, with 45% saying it’s very likely their next personal vehicle will be all-electric, and 40% saying it might be. 55% of survey respondents want to learn more about electric vehicles for personal use, while 27% say they already know a lot. 56% of respondents who already own an electric vehicle would charge their vehicles at work if there were a charger at their office. Of those who are considering switching to an electric vehicle, 33% would charge their vehicle every day if they could, and 39% would charge a few times a week. This is helpful because allowing employees to charge at work during the day while fleet vehicles are in use would help offset the cost of the charger (staff recommend employees pay to charge). The County Library hosted a Drive Clean webinar on September 1 as part of its community education program. The August 2022 G3 Champion meeting focused on water conservation and included a presentation from the Contra Costa Water District. G3 Champions are educating their co-workers about water conservation strategies at home and in the office. The G3 Champions introduced themselves to the Board of Supervisors on at the June 7 Board meeting. Video of that presentation can be found at https://youtu.be/cf1Hk3RpK70. Department Progress Several departments shared their progress on climate action at the August 2022 Task Force meeting. Highlights are provided below. The Fire Protection District has purchased two all-electric Rivian pickup trucks. The Fire District is piloting them for chief officer response vehicles and utility vehicles. This will help the Fire District better understand how it can use electric vehicles in the light truck category. The recent annexation of East County into the Fire District is making the solar farm near Pittsburg more financially viable because there are more accounts against which to offset the electricity generated by the panels. The Fire District is looking to potentially remove all-grass lawns at fire houses and replace them with drought-tolerant landscaping. It also is working on energy efficiency improvements at fire stations. The County Library surveyed patrons recently and environmental sustainability was identified as a key concern for the community. The Library has many sustainability resources on its web site at https://ccclib.org/explore/?tag=sustainability. At library branches, patrons can check out energy efficiency tool kits to analyze their home’s performance, check out seeds from the seed libraries, and check out California State Parks passes, among other things. The Library sponsors bike repair workshops, master gardener classes, and climate career chats, some online, some in person. As mentioned above, on September 1 the Library hosted an Electrify Your Ride webinar. The Library is exploring purchasing an electric van for its newly launched early literacy outreach program, and is looking at how it can convert its delivery trucks to all-electric. The Health Department has joined the National Academy of Medicine’s Climate Collaborative. It is looking at installing solar on the new parking structure at the Medical Center. The Health Department leads the Green and Healthy Homes Asthma Initiative, in partnership with the Department of Conservation and Development and MCE, the County’s electricity provider. The Health Department distributed 16,000 masks in East County to help residents affected by the Marsh Fire and is working with the Office of Emergency Services on Clean Air Grants. The Health Department has joined Practice GreenHealth, a program that will help reduce waste and emissions from medical facilities. Health also worked with two graduate student interns recently from UC Berkeley. The Employment and Human Services Department developed a climate action plan for the department last year. EHSD is installing low-flow faucets at 50 Douglas and has work orders pending to replace faucets at other facilities. EHSD is excited to energize the new solar panels at Delta Fair later this year. EHSD is starting to look at how to convert its fleet to all-electric. The Public Works Department has recently enrolled County facilities in programs to save energy and money. The County is enrolling in MCE’s Strategic Energy Management Program, which will help the County update the 2001 Energy Reduction Action Plan and save tens of thousands of dollars. County participation in PG&E’s demand response program will lead to significant energy savings and create both revenue and electric grid benefits, in line with Governor Newsom’s grid resiliency goals. The Task Force is encouraged by the progress County departments are making to help the County achieve its climate action goals. The Task Force will continue to focus on implementing the Sustainability Fund and the G3 Champion program. CLERK'S ADDENDUM Speakers: Chi Chi; Caller 6770. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A; Sustainability Fund Progress Report Attachment B: G3 Champion Program Update Sustainability Fund Update August 2022 Presented by: Brendan Havenar-Daughton, Energy Manager Capital Projects Management, Public Works Brendan.Havenar-Daughton@pw.cccounty.us Presented to: Interdepartmental Climate Action Task Force August 17, 2022 Presentation Overview u Sustainability Fund Overview & Management u EVCS Project Update u Map of County EVCS (owned & proposed) u Your Engagement Acronyms EV – Electric Vehicle ZEV – Zero Emissions Vehicle EVCS – Electric Vehicle Charging Stations PV – Photovoltaic (Solar Panels) DER – Distributed Energy Resources EE – Energy Efficiency 2 3 Fund Establishment u March 2021, Funded by Measure X u Vision = A sustained source of funding u First projects: u EV Charging (year 1) u Energy Efficiency Equip. Retrofits (year 2) Fund Management u Cost-effective, value-rich investments u Establish key investment criteria u Manage for growth (ID revenue streams) u Annual reporting on key metrics Sustainability Fund Overview Sustainability Fund Overview 4 5 YEAR OUTLOOK REVENUE/GROWTH Fund Management u Cost-effective & value-rich investments u Manage for growth u Annual reporting on key metrics Cost-Effective & Value-Rich Investments 5 u Establish key investment criteria § High ROI § High GHG emissions reduc3on § Leveraged funding (third party and Departmental) § High visibility/flagship/leading by example projects § Incremental funding for commiDed Departmental priority projects § 10-15% of project cost) • 25-30% for DER project priori3es (e.g., EVCS, cost-effec3ve EE) § G3 Champions priority projects § Projects that are less conducive to financing § Alignment with DER Plan NOTE: All Content on this page is considered DRAFT and requires additional review and approval Manage for Growth 6 Potential Revenue Source Anticipated Amount Renewable Energy Certificates from PV resources Six figures California Low-Carbon Fuel Standard Credits (LCSF) Likely 4 figures to start, 5 figures by 2025 Demand Response Cash Payments Up-to $50,000/year Strategic Energy Management Program Participation $6,000/year Energy Efficiency Cash Incentives 10-20% of total project investment NOTE: All Content on this page is considered DRAFT and requires additional review and approval Annual Reporting on Key Metrics 7 § By project § By department § Savings / ROI § Leveraged revenue § GHG emissions reduc3ons § etc.… NOTE: All Content on this page is considered DRAFT and requires additional review and approval Year 1 Priority - Sustainability Fund u Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure u Priority 1: Serve County Fleet Needs u Priority 2: Workplace Charging for Employees (charging fees paid by employees) u Priority 3: Publicly accessible charging in County’s most Impacted Communities 8 Relationship Between Priorities 1 2 3 u Opportunities for shared Charging Stations u Fleet + Employee = Many u Employee + Public = Few u Public + Fleet = None Electric Vehicle Charging Levels Overview 9 Level Time Required to Recharge Battery to Full Electrical Capacity 1 1 week (3-5 miles/hr) 120 volts AC 2 8 hours (12-40 miles/hr) 240 volts AC 3 1 hour (200+ miles/hr) High Voltage DC *Charging times and speeds will very. This chart is provided to communicate for understanding and represents generalized assumptions. EVCS Project Update Scope of Work Description Overview 50+ Level 2 stations across 15 sites,1 to 4 ports per station; feasibility of DC Fast Charging Station(s) Budget $2,500,000 (PW Sustainability Fund) Status Feasibility Analysis phase of first 5 sites with On-Call Design Team Schedule Goal: First install by Q1 2023, project completion by Dec 2024 Procurement Design-Bid-Build and/or Job-Order- Contracting Cost/Supply Chain Evaluation of equipment cost increases and supply chain risks is underway (e.g transformers are 12-18 months backlogged) Next Step Finalize Design Team’s Scope of Work Future- Proofing Automated Load Management Systems EV EV EV EV VS EV EV EV EV 40 amps 4 vehicles 80% of Need 160 amps 4 vehicles 100% of Need 4x the cost 4x dedicated circuits High Demand Charges 10 EXAMPLE County-Owned, Operated and Proposed EVCS Level 2 EVCS 8hr charge = full battery Existing Proposed 35 50+ 6 Sites 15 Sites 11 Level 3 EVCS 1hr charge = full battery Existing Potential 0 2 0 Sites 2 Sites Proposed Sites 50 Douglas Dr, Martinez 30 Muir Rd, Martinez 255 Glacier Dr, Martinez 4945 Delta Fair Blvd, Antioch 2475 Waterbird Way, Martinez 4549 Delta Fair Blvd, Antioch 595/597 Center Ave, Martinez 2530 Arnold Dr, Martinez 1960 Muir Rd, Martinez 202 Glacier Dr, Martinez 151 Linus Pauling, Hercules 5555 Giant Hwy, Richmond 1305 McDonald Ave, Richmond 1650 Cavallo Rd, Antioch 12000 Marsh Creek Rd, Clayton Your Engagement is Important u Energy Manager working closely with Fleet Services to install EVCS and encourage fleet electrification u Quarterly meetings with Fleet u Project specific collaboration with Energy Manager u Coordination with Real-estate for adding EVCS language in the lease agreement 12 Current Project – Electric Vehicle Charging Stations u Energy Manager working closely with Facilities Services to identify energy efficiency opportunities u Energy Manager to offer technical support to identify and implement projects u Leverage third-party incentive programs Near-Future Project – Energy Efficiency Equipment Retrofits Please Share Questions and Comments Thank you. Presented by: Brendan Havenar-Daughton, Energy Manager Capital Projects Management, Public Works Brendan.Havenar-Daughton@pw.cccounty.us Presented to: Interdepartmental Climate Action Task Force August 17, 2022 G3 CHAMPION PROGRAM UPDATE August 17, 2022 Champion Overview •67 Champions (to date) •Departments: •Agriculture •Animal Services •Health (multiple divisions) •Child Support Services •County Administrator •County Counsel •Conservation and Development •Human Resources •Library (every branch!) •Probation •Public Defender •Public Works •Treasurer-Tax Collector •Risk Management •Employment and Human Services •Communications and Media •Meetings are every other month •Topic for each meeting keyed off Green Business Program best practices •April 2022: Bike to Work Week •June 2022: Electric Vehicles •August 2o22: Water Conservation •October 2022: Energy Conservation •December 2022: Avoid Waste •February 2023: Non-Toxic Cleaners •April 2023: Prevent Pollution •Follow-up assignments 2 Initial Feedback from Champions 3 Less than 2 hours 68% 2-3 hours 29% More than 3 hours 3% I am spending this much time on the G3 program each month. Less than 2 hours 2-3 hours More than 3 hours Agree 64% Strongly agree 14% Disagree 11% Strongly disagree 7%Does not apply to me 4% I feel that my office/department is becoming more aware of opportunities for County government to address climate change. Agree Strongly agree Disagree Strongly disagree Does not apply to me Bike to Work Week •22 Total Participants from the following departments: •Agriculture/Weights & Measures •Animal Services •Conservation and Development •County Administration •Health Services •Library •Probation •Public Defender •Public Works •Conservation and Development won the Bike to Work Week Interdepartmental Competition, with 8 participants (approximately 5% of department staff). Interdepartmental Competition 4 Bike to Work Week •HIGHLIGHTS: Feel enjoyment from riding a bike, get out and breathe fresh air, get exercise, feel more energetic at work, demonstrate that biking to the working is a feasible commute option, encourage coworkers to ride a bike to work •CHALLENGES: Safety from cars on the street, desire for more bike lanes or even a protected/separated bike lane/path •CHALLENGE: Only some County offices have bike racks, including secure bike parking spaces, and even fewer offices have lockers/showers •HIGHLIGHT: A number of participants were either G3 Champions or learned about the competition through the G3 Champions Input Received from the Bike Survey 5 Electric Vehicle Education •100 people attended July 12 Lunch and Learn, with more who wanted to participate •1,167 responses to employee survey! (not all people answered every question) 6 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY EMPLOYEES WANT TO DRIVE ELECTRIC! 7 COUNTY EMPLOYEES WOULD USE CHARGERS AT WORK 8 RECOMMENDATION(S): Consider the following actions recommended by the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD), Health, Housing and Homeless Services (H3) division of Contra Costa Health Services and the Executive Director of the Housing Authority of Contra Costa County (Housing Authority) (collectively, Housing Fund Staff Team): 1. ACCEPT report on preparatory work related to the Measure X Housing Fund and the $10 million dollars available in year one. 2. AUTHORIZE the Housing Fund Staff Team to proceed with Notices of Funding Availability (NOFAs) and Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for various affordable housing and homelessness prevention and crisis response projects, consistent with the approach outlined in the presentation and reflecting any further direction provided by the Board. 3. DIRECT the Housing Fund Staff Team to provide a progress update to the Board in December of 2022. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Measure X funds. This report addresses the proposed process for allocating only the $10 million approved by the Board for the Measure X Housing Fund in Year 1. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS Contact: John Kopchik 925 655-2780 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: , Deputy cc: D.4 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Measure X Housing Fund BACKGROUND: Following November 2020 voter approval of the Measure X half-cent sales tax, in June 2021, the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD); Contra Costa Health Services: Health, Housing and Homeless Services (H3); and the Housing Authority of Contra Costa County (Housing Authority) submitted a joint proposal to the Measure X Community Advisory Board (MXCAB) to dedicate Measure X receipts to a new Housing Fund that would fund affordable housing and a broad list of housing-related services.. On November 16, the Board considered recommendations from MXCAB, approved the Housing Fund proposal, and committed $10 million for Year one and $12 million on an annual basis thereafter. Attachment 1 to this item is the description of the Measure X Housing Fund provided to the Board on November 16, 2021. Since creation of the Measure X Housing Fund, staff from DCD, H3, and the Housing Authority have formed a Housing Fund Staff Team and are working collaboratively to plan for the distribution of the Year 1 Housing Fund dollars to best respond to Contra Costa County resident needs. On August 11, 2022, the Housing Fund Staff Team convened a Stakeholder meeting, inviting more than 350 developers, service providers, and public agency staff to receive an update on the Housing Fund Staff Team’s initial ideas for the program and inviting comments and questions. A meeting summary, accompanied by a record of original comments made in the meeting and submitted in follow-up emails is included as Attachment 2 to this item. A list of questions received in the Stakeholder meeting and immediately following, along with responses from the Housing Fund Staff Team, is included as Attachment 3 to this item. Based on feedback received by the 80 stakeholder attendees in the meeting and in follow up emails, the Housing Fund Staff Team has refined the ideas for the overall process of funding distribution and key components of program guidelines for Board review and approval. These ideas are outlined in the presentation slides (Attachment 4 to this item). This approach would apply to Year 1 funding only. The Housing Fund Staff Team anticipates additional planning and outreach to inform the approach to distributing Year 2 funding and continual refinements, as needed, throughout the life of the program to enable the Housing Fund to respond to the County’s housing needs as they evolve over time. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the initiation of the RFP process is not authorized, then the process for distributing the Measure X Housing Fund will not be commenced and an opportunity to coordinate solicitation of proposals to produce or preserve affordable housing across multiple funding sources will be missed. CLERK'S ADDENDUM Speakers: Logan Campbell, Recovery community; Chi Chi; Caller 6770;; Noah; Todd; Max Henninger, Eden Housing; Kristi, Raise the Roof Coalition, East Bay Alliance for an Affordable Economy; Sara; Ellen; Jackie, Antioch; James Daniels, Pinole. Written commentary provided by Rachel Rosekind (attached) AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1-- Description of Measure X Housing Fund Considered by Board on November 16, 2021 Attachment 2-- Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Summary and Appendix Attachment 3--Measure X Housing Fund FAQ Attachment 4-- Housing Fund Presentation MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Correspondence Received Attachment B.11 Local Housing Trust Fund (Including Funding for Homeless Housing/Services): $12,000,000 (On-going) Staff from the Housing Authority, Health Services-Health, Housing, and Homeless Services, and Department of Conservation and Development request that a new Housing Trust Fund be funded with $12 million annually, with the top priority of building permanent housing for people earning less than 50% of the Area Median Income. The concept of a local, flexible housing fund has been discussed in Contra Costa County for more than 20 years and establishing a dedicated source of revenue to fund it would create many opportunities for matching other housing grants from the State and philanthropic sources. If approved at this funding level, a process to determine an allocation plan and business plan would follow. Details to be developed include program structure, funding guidelines, balance of funding priorities, staffing plan, and success metrics. The initial interdisciplinary staff team would work through a designated Board committee to bring a full proposal and annual/multi-year allocations to the Board for review and approval. This program fulfills Strategy #2 under the Measure X Community Advisory Board’s Goal #3 (as reported to the Board on Oct. 12, 2021). Elements of the Housing Trust Fund are anticipated to include: •Direct funding for the construction, acquisition, preservation, and rehabilitation of permanent affordable housing for people earning less than 50% of the Area Median Income; •Strategic use (lease, sale, or joint ventures) of County-owned surplus land and other underutilized land; •Technical assistance to build capacity of non-profit housing developers and homeless service providers to expand to underserved geographic areas. This could include “housing innovation” pilot programs for creative solutions and concepts new to the Contra Costa housing market like land trusts; •Dedicated funds for homelessness prevention, such as legal services and rental assistance as well as homeless crisis response solutions including emergency and interim housing; •On-going funding for supportive services necessary to maintain housing, including operating subsidies; •Active grant-writing to leverage resources for construction and preservation of affordable housing. The estimated annual cost to fund a program, including staff support to administer grants and directly implement housing priorities, is $12 million, with an approximate 6-9 month timeframe to develop the detailed proposal for full Board review and approval. Recommendation: The County Administrator’s recommendation is that the program be funded at $10,000,000 for year-one and an on-going annual allocation beginning July 1, 2023, of $12,000,000. The Department of Conservation and Development would be the County host agency. Attachment 1: Description of Measure X Housing Fund Considered by Board on November 16, 2021 Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Summary Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting | Thursday, August 11, 2022 BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION Measure X is a ½ cent 20-year countywide sales tax approved by voters in November 2020. Formation of the Measure X Housing Fund was proposed by representatives from the Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development (DCD); Health Services-Health, Housing, and Homeless Services (H3); and the Housing Authority and approved by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors in November 2021. The program was allocated $10 million for its first year and $12 million annually thereafter from Measure X, for a 20-year total of $238 million. The Housing Fund Staff Team, composed of staff from DCD, H3, and the Housing Authority, have been working collaboratively to initiate planning for the distribution of Housing Fund monies. In the Stakeholder Meeting, the Housing Fund Staff Team asked for input on preliminary ideas for funding distribution prior to making recommendations to the Board. The Stakeholder Meeting was held over Zoom on Thursday, August 11, 2022. This meeting focused on key areas of the potential program structure and requested input on the funding distribution approach. Discussion centered around program goals, eligible projects, funding minimums, funding types, process for distributing funds, selection criteria, reporting requirements, and general feedback. There were 80stakeholders in attendance. Comments were also accepted via email through Friday, August 19, 2022. All comments received in the meeting and via email are included in this meeting summary. MEETING PRESENTATION The meeting was facilitated by consultants from PlaceWorks who began the meeting by reviewing the agenda and introducing presenting staff: John Kopchik, Director of DCD; Joseph Villarreal, Executive Director of the Contra Costa County Housing Authority; Lavonna Martin, Deputy Director of Contra Costa Health Services; and Christy Saxton, Director of Health, Housing and Homeless Services. As part of the presentation, staff provided an overview of Measure X and the Housing Fund, followed by a description of the proposed eligible project types, county work efforts, funding minimums, funding types, process for funding distribution, and award selection criteria. Meeting presentation slides can be viewed here. Following the presentation, staff and consultants held an open-ended question and answer session before breaking into small group discussions. Those questions and others have been aggregated into an FAQ document. SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS Participants joined breakout groups for a facilitated discussion with topical prompts for each of the initially proposed features of the Housing Fund funding distribution approach presented in the meeting. Meeting participants were encouraged to discuss their perspectives in response to the proposed program structure and other ideas. Note-takers for each group captured comments in a shared Google Doc visible Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Summary August 11, 2022 Page 2 on the screen. The note files from each breakout group and all comments submitted via email are included as an appendix to this meeting summary. The initially proposed program features used as discussion prompts in the breakout group are shown below, followed by a bulleted list of stakeholder comments (including in-meeting and emailed comments) related to the topic. Ideas presented by multiple commentors are generally consolidated in this meeting summary, except when paired with unique, additional concepts. Recorded comments do not signify consensus; in some instances, commenters presented conflicting viewpoints, as shown below. Note, due to timing limitations of the breakout groups and participant preferences, not all groups responded to each topic. TOPIC: PROGRAM GOALS  Top priority to fund affordable housing production and preservation  Support the housing needs of Contra Costa County residents  Prioritize filling funding gaps not addressed by other sources  Leverage funds wherever possible  Explore opportunities to make the Housing Fund sustainable beyond the 20-year horizon of Measure X Community Member Comments  General support for the goals as articulated. o Appreciate effort to not be restrictive. o Important to have county-wide pot for affordable housing. o Important to have local funds to leverage other sources. o Support for seeking state match for the fund. o Some programs can’t leverage funds and might need County funding more.  Add goal promoting health of community and potential residents of these units.  NOFA/RFP should include considerations for air quality, climate change impacts, tree canopy/green infrastructure, electric vehicle charging infrastructure, and bike and pedestrian infrastructure.  Include mitigating equity disparities as an explicit goal. Ensure that applicants who demonstrate a capacity to address Contra Costa's most concerning racial and spatial disparities are prioritized.  Prioritize leveraging funds (like State and federal dollars) over filling gaps to maximize the economic impact of the funds.  Prioritize leveraging existing programs within H3 - Homeless Prevention, Housing Navigation, rental assistance and rapid re-housing, etc. Model after Oakland – “Keep Oakland Housed”.  Funds should be spent now rather than trying to create an ongoing fund. The need is urgent.  Measure X was not meant to be a long-term sustainable funding source (e.g., operating subsidy) and is intended to reflect community interests.  Funding for community service-oriented organizations should be a priority to make sure they are directly impacting low-income households of people of color.  Reinforce and strengthen solutions in communities with highest homelessness point in time counts. Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Summary August 11, 2022 Page 3 TOPIC: FUNDING DISTRIBUTION AND ELIGIBLE PROJECTS  75% of Funds for Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building  Affordable housing for people earning up to 60% AMI; focus on <50% AMI  Acquisition, pre-development, construction, rehabilitation, and operating and reserve funds  Supportive services necessary to maintain housing, including legal services and rental assistance.  Housing innovation pilot programs  Technical assistance to build capacity of non-profit housing developers and homeless service providers  Grant-writing  25% of Funds for Homeless Crisis Response  Emergency and interim housing, including pilot projects Community Comments  Given how expensive it is to build housing, the tilt to housing development seems appropriate.  Require at least five-million-dollar allocation for acquiring, preserving, and converting housing to permanently affordable housing.  Housing crisis is larger than simply supply.  Appreciate the emphasis on building homes for households at or below 50% of area median income (AMI).  Concern that the goal to fill funding gaps will mean that funds are not eligible re-entry housing because AB109 (prison realignment) provides some funding to addresses that.  There is a disproportionate emphasis on the production of housing, and not enough on prevention of homelessness to address issues, acutely impacting people of color being displaced, often by unscrupulous means.  At least $1.8m should be dedicated to rental assistance and legal assistance.  Increase maximum AMI for eligible projects to better leverage funds and create more financially sustainable developments. Not sure whether 80% or 120% AMI is appropriate; it may make sense to engage with non-profit housing developers to explore what might better facilitate projects.  Ensure affordable housing production and preservation don't subsume other needs, including homelessness prevention.  Include a minimum annual percentage dedicated to homelessness prevention.  Loans for mobile home owners are an existing funding gap.  Rehabilitation is more cost effective than new single-family homes. Some money should be set aside for renovations, including for properties within flood zones, rather than all funding going towards new units. (Note: the initial program ideas include rehabilitation as an eligible project type).  Addressing the causes and effects of homelessness should be the County's number one concern; request that you treat homelessness prevention projects as eligible for monies from both DCD and H3.  Within 75% tranche, emphasize anti-displacement, preservation, smaller unit sizes, privately owned housing on the housing market with no public subsidy attached to it.  Include homeowner activities and support like down payment assistance. Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Summary August 11, 2022 Page 4  Consider funding for group housing, co-housing, and shared ownership models (CLT’s, Coops, CHDO’s, etc.), including above 50% AMI.  Ensure a portion of funds is used to acquire and preserve 1-4 unit buildings.  Ensure a portion of funds is used to acquire and preserve apartment buildings with 5-25 units.  Program needs a definition for preservation.  Suggest 2/3 and 1/3 breakdown instead of 75% and 25%.  Funding should be eligible for preservation of community housing, like land trusts, and family housing like four-plexes.  Build capacity through sustained investment in emerging service providers.  Provide an option for multiyear operating assistance, rather than just granting for single years or specific projects, in order to give emerging service providers the stability needed to invest their resources in growing their capacity in Contra Costa County.  Include rapid rehousing in the 25%.  Include outreach (CORE) for homeless prevention/crisis response as an option for funding within the 25%.  Support a walk-up shelter in the county serving as a resource, stability option, or as part of transitioning into housing.  Create a Contra Costa County program for universal basic income under the innovations category.  Glad to see pilot projects allowed in 25%; hoping to see non-brick and mortar, cost-efficient, cost-effective options for getting folks out of encampments.  H3 NOFA should specifically recognize that transitional housing projects can support “tiny cabins” and cabin-type communities.  TESLA is now offering tiny homes for $10k each.  Temporary relocation should be an eligible use (hotels, Airbnb’s and extended stays are currently not an eligible use under CDBG). Hotel and motel program has been successful in the City of Concord; this should be replicated in other places and vouchers should be offered to anyone below 50% AMI.  Clarify parameters for municipal applicants. Do not allow Cities to regrant funds. TOPIC: COUNTY WORK EFFORTS  10% of funds administered by each department (DCD and H3) will support:  Funding Distribution ▪ Administering the notice of funding availability (NOFA)/ Request for Proposals (RFP) ▪ Reviewing applications ▪ Developing contracts to distribute funding ▪ Loan servicing ▪ Contract monitoring ▪ Reporting outcomes  Capacity Building and Planning ▪ Capacity-building technical assistance ▪ Grant-writing ▪ County staff support for housing production, including the strategic use of surplus and underutilized land ▪ Future fund planning Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Summary August 11, 2022 Page 5 Community Comments  At least 10% of funds for administration is appropriate. It costs more than 10% to manage this kind of effort.  Concerns about accountability and oversight with regards to finances, especially management companies.  There should be safeguards so that the funds are for additional work and not just work that has already been funded. TOPIC: FUNDING MINIMUMS AND FUNDING TYPES  Affordable Housing  Pre-Development: $25,000  Everything else: $500,000  Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building: $25,000  Homeless Crisis Response: $25,000  Loans (low interest, flexible terms)  Capital projects (new construction and substantial rehabilitation) with new affordability terms of 45+ years (homeownership), 55+ years (rental).  Grants  Housing-related services  Seed/innovation projects Community Comments  The County should consider what they would like maximums to be as well.  A $500,000 minimum is too high for some renovation and micro home projects. Consider decreasing.  Housing Fund should prioritize awards for local agencies invested in active delivery of homelessness programming at a minimum of $1 million.  Affordable housing developers are competing with market-rate housing developers. Do not set a per unit cap, as this could put affordable housing developers at a disadvantage. TOPIC: PROCESS FOR FUNDING DISTRIBUTION  Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building  Release NOFA and hold NOFA kickoff meeting—October  Applications due—December  Application Reviews—December-February 2023  Recommendations to Committee—March-April  Recommendations to the Board—May  Award Letters Released—June  Homeless Crisis Response projects  Community involvement in NOFA design—October  Release NOFA: December/January  Applications due—January/February  Application Reviews—February Recommendations to Committee—March-April Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Summary August 11, 2022 Page 6  Recommendations to the Board—May  Award Letters Released—June Community Comments  Tying this into existing housing NOFA will streamline this process. This is a good policy.  Tie the funding award to the State tax credit calendar.  Ensure application process is open and available for those who don’t apply for Federal funds.  This timeline is not good for acquisition rehab that need 30-90 days.  The timeline aligning with federal funds would hurt preservation strategies. TOPIC: AWARD SELECTION CRITERIA  Affordable Housing  Project Readiness  Financial and Cost Analysis  Developer Experience/Capacity  Project Targeting and Characteristics  Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building  Project Readiness  Project Readiness  Financial and Cost Analysis  Service Provider Experience  Impact  Homeless Crisis Response  Project Description  Budget and Justification  Qualifications Community Comments  Recognize city-initiated programs that, like the County, engage in evidence-based practices and ultimately increase the overall number of unhoused residents served.  Match funds for local agencies who prioritize homelessness in their allocation of ARPA resources and utilization of City owned/leased sites. TOPIC: ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, FEEDBACK, AND IDEAS Community Comments  Setting the program up to include a revolving loan fund could create long-term sustainability.  If it’s a renovation project, new terms for affordability shouldn’t be a requirement.  Don’t preclude new developers from being eligible.  Funding agreements should include terms to make sure a certain program/project is performing to assist people.  Smaller providers have trouble getting into programs. Measure X could support increase in providers.  Create a board to identify communities that could especially benefit from this money and/or are especially impacted by displacement (e.g., people of color, elders, etc.). Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Summary August 11, 2022 Page 7  Inadequate housing and affordability issues abound, and some people are not able to stay in their homes.  DCD should engage community further in the process to distribute funds, like H3 is planning to do.  Measure X Housing Funds should reflect community and advisory board in Measure X process.  Some individuals at today’s session seem to have had questions as to how the draft Housing Trust program follows what was presented to the MXCAB. I pulled my notes from the June 30, 2021, presentation and today’s outline is very consistent with the presentation. The $12 million “ask” last year was to create a fund to “build permanent housing…utilize an interdepartmental team…offer technical assistance for housing…and address homelessness prevention”. I think you’ve advance that effort.  Worried about precedent being set in first year of funding. It’s worth trying to get it right in the beginning. Don’t want to be cutting corners on genuine community process and creativity.  Consider consolidating the $10 million of first year funding (FY 2021/22) with the current fiscal year ($12 million). If the preference is to keep a funding buffer, then perhaps allocate half of FY 2022/23 to the initial round.  I appreciate the way you all have branded this effort: the Measure X Housing Fund. As projects roll out in the future, voters will see that the sales tax increase actually provided something of value to County residents.  Don’t want the establishment of the Housing Fund to cause cities to simply rely on the County, rather than leverage their own abundant resources to duly address local housing needs. Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Appendix APPENDIX A. STAKEHOLDER MEETING BREAKOUT DISCUSSION NOTES Contra Costa County Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Stakeholder Breakout Group 1 Notes Comments on Initial Ideas for Measure X Housing Fund Distribution (28 minutes). Stakeholders, in the time available, please share your feedback on the initial ideas presented today. You may submit additional comments to measurexhousingfund@dcd.cccounty.us through next Friday, August 19, to ensure all of your feedback is captured and considered as these ideas are refined. 1. Program Goals ○ Support the housing needs of Contra Costa County residents ■ Top priority to fund affordable housing production and preservation ○ Prioritize filling funding gaps not addressed by other sources ○ Leverage funds wherever possible ○ Explore opportunities to make the Housing Fund sustainable beyond the 20-year horizon of Measure X Comments ● Measure X - Emergency Hospitals, Fires, etc.? $10 million we are talking about today is set for housing dev., housing services, homeless services only. ● Where/how was the top priority set? What about homeless prevention as a top priority? Top priority was a part of the initial request to the Measure X Comm. Board. And was set as part of the approval to the BOS in Nov. 2021. ● Within 75% tranche, an impact for anti-displacement, preservation, smaller unit sizes, privately owned housing on the housing market with no public subsidy attached to it. ● Legal services ($1.8 million) is an important aspect for keeping people housed. Look for the letter proposal to MXCAB - more detailed information within. ● Does it have to be an individual household/family per unit or a group shared housing situation? Would a shared housing situation be a private sleeping area/bedroom, and shared kitchen/bathroom? SRO? Cafeteria shared food situation? 2. Funding Distribution ○ 75% of Funds for Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ■ Affordable housing for people earning up to 60% AMI AMI; focus on <50% AMI ■ Acquisition, pre-development, construction, rehabilitation, and operating and reserve funds ■ Supportive services necessary to maintain housing, including legal services and rental assistance. ■ Housing innovation pilot programs ■ Technical assistance to build capacity of non-profit housing developers and homeless service providers ■ Grant-writing ○ 25% of Funds for Homeless Crisis Response ■ Emergency and interim housing, including pilot projects Comments ● Is this document being shared with everyone in the other breakout rooms? Yes blank presentation will be posted online for additional opportunity for answers. ● What other developers are being involved in the discussion? How are these conversations being had with developers organizations? ● What about community service oriented organizations to make sure they are directly impacting low income households of people of color. This should be a priority going forward. ● 75% / 25% split - what about ⅔ / ⅓ breakdown instead? ● Leveraging existing programs within H3 - Homeless Prevention, Housing Navigation, rental assistance and rapid re-housing, etc. (model after “Oakland - Keep Oakland Housed”) ● Funding decisions looked at with an equity lens. Every decision point is looked at to make sure we are touching/assisting the most vulnerable populations. ● [from chat] Please reference: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CGEqB8oH3t- p7LdzbDI464kxQ04dEVk-jocdSvB6kL4/edit?usp=sharing and if you can record the following language in the notes: Require at least five million dollar allocation to acquiring, preserving, and converting housing to permanently affordable housing. Require a set aside for shared ownership models (CLT’s, Coops, CHDO’s, etc.). Ensure a portion of the Fund program is used to acquire and preserve 1-4 unit buildings. Ensure a portion of the Fund is used to acquire and preserve apartment buildings with 5-25 units. ● [from chat] In the innovations of Housing Pilots programs for Supportive Services will Contra Costa create a program for Guaranteed Income? Many other counties have started piloting programs such as this. 3. County Work Efforts ○ 10% of funds administered by each department (DCD and H3) will support: ■ Funding Distribution ● Administering the notice of funding availability (NOFA)/ Request for Proposals (RFP) ● Reviewing applications ● Developing contracts to distribute funding ● Loan servicing ● Contract monitoring ● Reporting outcomes ■ Capacity Building and Planning ● Capacity-building technical assistance ● Grant-writing ● County staff support for housing production, including the strategic use of surplus and underutilized land ● Future fund planning Comments ● None at this time. 4. Funding Minimums and Funding Types ○ Affordable Housing ■ Pre-Development: $25,000 ■ Everything else: $500,000 ○ Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building: $25,000 ○ Homeless Crisis Response: $25,000 ○ Loans (low interest, flexible terms ■ Capital projects (new construction and substantial rehabilitation with new affordability terms of 45+ years (homeownership), 55+ years (rental). ○ Grants ■ Housing-related services ■ Seed/innovation projects Comments ● Homeless prevention/crisis response - is outreach (CORE) an option for funding within the 25%. 5. Process for Funding Distribution ○ Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ■ Release NOFA and hold NOFA kickoff meeting—October ■ Applications due—December ■ Application Reviews—December-February 2023 ■ Recommendations to Committee—March-April ■ Recommendations to the Board—May ■ Award Letters Released—June ○ Homeless Crisis Response projects ■ Community involvement in NOFA design—October ■ Release NOFA: December/January ■ Applications due—January/February ■ Application Reviews—February Recommendations to Committee—March- April ■ Recommendations to the Board—May ■ Award Letters Released—June Comments ● Importance for using Housing Trust funds for leverage to multiply for larger funding from the State/federal/home-key, tax credits etc. ● Prototype within 1st year - return on investment? (reduce homeless and harm, #of people helped). Hope to spark innovation for a new prototype program. Goals within the contracts written to make sure a certain program/project is performing to assist people. ● Possibility for return on investment for rental housing development, residual receipts payment, revolving loan fund. Not a requirement, but a potential option. 6. Award Selection Criteria Affordable Housing ● Project Readiness ● Financial and Cost Analysis ● Developer Experience/Capacity ● Project Targeting and Characteristics Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ● Project Readiness ● Project Readiness ● Financial and Cost Analysis ● Service Provider Experience ● Impact Homeless Crisis Response ● Project Description ● Budget and Justification ● Qualifications Comments ● None at this time 7. Additional Comments, Feedback, and Ideas ● None at this time QUESTIONS ● Measure X - Emergency Hospitals, Fires, etc.? $10 million we are talking about today is set for housing dev., housing services, homeless services only. ● Where/how was the top priority set? What about homeless prevention as a top priority? Top priority was a part of the initial request to the Measure X Comm. Board. And was set as part of the approval to the BOS in Nov. 2021. ● Does it have to be an individual household/family per unit or a group shared housing situation? Would a shared housing situation be a private sleeping area/bedroom, and shared kitchen/bathroom? SRO? Cafeteria shared food situation? ● Is this document being shared with everyone in the other breakout rooms? Yes blank presentation will be posted online for additional opportunity for answers. ● What other developers are being involved in the discussion? How are these conversations being had with developers organizations? Contra Costa County Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Stakeholder Breakout Group 2 Notes Comments on Initial Ideas for Measure X Housing Fund Distribution (28 minutes). Stakeholders, in the time available, please share your feedback on the initial ideas presented today. You may submit additional comments to measurexhousingfund@dcd.cccounty.us through next Friday, August 19, to ensure all of your feedback is captured and considered as these ideas are refined. 1. Program Goals ○ Support the housing needs of Contra Costa County residents ■ Top priority to fund affordable housing production and preservation ○ Prioritize filling funding gaps not addressed by other sources ○ Leverage funds wherever possible ○ Explore opportunities to make the Housing Fund sustainable beyond the 20-year horizon of Measure X Comments ● Great set of goals - needs nuance. ● Housing Trust Fund - require set-aside for different types of models ● Base unit count amount ● Any discussion about opening a walk-up shelter in CCC? Can provide a great resource/stability/transitioning into housing. Help people who are in the middle. ● Goals generally look good. Concerned about programs that can’t leverage funds. Might need County funding more. Tenant legal services. ● Overlap between CDBG application and Measure X application process/is it open and available for those who don’t apply for Federal funds? Federal cycle. ● Do you need to be receiving services in order to qualify for the program? ● Homeowners? Will there be assistance for down payments, etc.? ● Would like to see homeowner activities included. ● Appreciate effort to not be restrictive. 2. Funding Distribution ○ 75% of Funds for Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ■ Affordable housing for people earning up to 60% AMI AMI; focus on <50% AMI ■ Acquisition, pre-development, construction, rehabilitation, and operating and reserve funds ■ Supportive services necessary to maintain housing, including legal services and rental assistance. ■ Housing innovation pilot programs ■ Technical assistance to build capacity of non-profit housing developers and homeless service providers ■ Grant-writing ○ 25% of Funds for Homeless Crisis Response ■ Emergency and interim housing, including pilot projects Comments ● Explain capacity building ● For 25%: rapid rehousing? Is there an opening for it? Is it deliberately left out? ● How is preservation being defined? Acquisition strategy to prevent homelessness ● This timeline is not good for acquisition rehab - need 30-90 days. More traditional escrow process. ● An opportunity to put funds into the 25% to access those dollars in a quicker way. ● The timeline aligning with federal funds would hurt preservation strategies. ● Timing: didn’t like the answer given - $10m not spent until the second year. Is the plan to maintain a year reserve? Reconsider. ● Think about stable, multi-year funding for agencies providing a service - capacity building. ● Galindo Terrace in Concord is very expensive per unit - not talking about that. Many production projects throughout the year. Reserve funds for non-production projects so one housing project does not eat up all of the money. ● Homeownership - understand how this fits in/collective ownership, shared ownership, etc. How many projects might not qualify because they aren’t at 50% AMI. 3. County Work Efforts ○ 10% of funds administered by each department (DCD and H3) will support: ■ Funding Distribution ● Administering the notice of funding availability (NOFA)/ Request for Proposals (RFP) ● Reviewing applications ● Developing contracts to distribute funding ● Loan servicing ● Contract monitoring ● Reporting outcomes ■ Capacity Building and Planning ● Capacity-building technical assistance ● Grant-writing ● County staff support for housing production, including the strategic use of surplus and underutilized land ● Future fund planning Comments ● No comments 4. Funding Minimums and Funding Types ○ Affordable Housing ■ Pre-Development: $25,000 ■ Everything else: $500,000 ○ Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building: $25,000 ○ Homeless Crisis Response: $25,000 ○ Loans (low interest, flexible terms ■ Capital projects (new construction and substantial rehabilitation with new affordability terms of 45+ years (homeownership), 55+ years (rental). ○ Grants ■ Housing-related services ■ Seed/innovation projects Comments ● Concerns about measuring risk for newer developers so they are not left out. 5. Process for Funding Distribution ○ Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ■ Release NOFA and hold NOFA kickoff meeting—October ■ Applications due—December ■ Application Reviews—December-February 2023 ■ Recommendations to Committee—March-April ■ Recommendations to the Board—May ■ Award Letters Released—June ○ Homeless Crisis Response projects ■ Community involvement in NOFA design—October ■ Release NOFA: December/January ■ Applications due—January/February ■ Application Reviews—February Recommendations to Committee—March- April ■ Recommendations to the Board—May ■ Award Letters Released—June Comments ● Application times - haven’t seen anything lower than a million in terms of applications. Change the floor number. ● Minimums: micro home projects - $500,000 might be too much for a minimum and some projects might be left out. 6. Award Selection Criteria Affordable Housing ● Project Readiness ● Financial and Cost Analysis ● Developer Experience/Capacity ● Project Targeting and Characteristics Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ● Project Readiness ● Project Readiness ● Financial and Cost Analysis ● Service Provider Experience ● Impact Homeless Crisis Response ● Project Description ● Budget and Justification ● Qualifications Comments ● No comments 7. Additional Comments, Feedback, and Ideas ● No comments Top 3 Ideas (3 minutes): In the final minutes remaining, please identify the top 2-3 topics discussed by the group. These will be shared in a brief report out, to give everyone a sense of the breadth of ideas discussed in different groups. Note, these points will not be weighted any differently than other feedback as the ideas for the Housing Fund are refined. 1. The timing and application process 2. The floor amount of $500,000 for projects might be too high 3. Homeownership/different models of housing should be considered. QUESTIONS Are you considering opening a walk-up shelter in the County? Will you be offering homeowner assistance? Can we still apply for Measure X funds if we aren’t also applying for Federal Funds? Do you need to already be receiving services in order to qualify for the program? Where is rapid rehousing? How is preservation being defined? Are you trying to maintain a year’s worth of reserve with the timing of this money? How will you ensure smaller, newer developers also have a chance at the funds? Contra Costa County Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Stakeholder Breakout Group 3 Notes Comments on Initial Ideas for Measure X Housing Fund Distribution (28 minutes). Stakeholders, in the time available, please share your feedback on the initial ideas presented today. You may submit additional comments to measurexhousingfund@dcd.cccounty.us through next Friday, August 19, to ensure all of your feedback is captured and considered as these ideas are refined. 1. Program Goals ○ Support the housing needs of Contra Costa County residents ■ Top priority to fund affordable housing production and preservation ○ Prioritize filling funding gaps not addressed by other sources ○ Leverage funds wherever possible ○ Explore opportunities to make the Housing Fund sustainable beyond the 20-year horizon of Measure X Comments ● Important to have local funds to leverage other sources ○ Good to look for state match ● Having county wide pot for affordable housing is is important ● Curious about funding gaps for re-entry housing, concerned this may not be funded because AB109 already exists for this ○ Measure X could meet those gaps ● H3 wants to lean into pilot and emerging projects, relatively unrestricted ● Measure X not meant to be long term sustainable funding (eg. operating subsidy) ○ Intended to reflect community interests ● Important to identify communities that could especially benefit from this money/impacted by displaced (eg. POC communities, elders) ○ Could create board for this ● Smaller providers have trouble getting into program ○ Measure X could support increase in providers 2. Funding Distribution ○ 75% of Funds for Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ■ Affordable housing for people earning up to 60% AMI AMI; focus on <50% AMI ■ Acquisition, pre-development, construction, rehabilitation, and operating and reserve funds ■ Supportive services necessary to maintain housing, including legal services and rental assistance. ■ Housing innovation pilot programs ■ Technical assistance to build capacity of non-profit housing developers and homeless service providers ■ Grant-writing ○ 25% of Funds for Homeless Crisis Response ■ Emergency and interim housing, including pilot projects Comments ● Why this breakdown? ○ Seems reasonable to some people in meeting, given how expensive it is to build ○ Housing crisis is larger than simply supply ○ Are supportive services covered in HCR (25%) or DCD (75%)? ■ HCR is more immediate support ■ DCD provides more legal services, and eviction prevention services ● How do we define preservation? ○ Are we preserving community housing (eg. land trust)? How are we preserving family housing (eg. four-plex)? ● Can AMI percentage change? ○ Unclear at this time 3. County Work Efforts ○ 10% of funds administered by each department (DCD and H3) will support: ■ Funding Distribution ● Administering the notice of funding availability (NOFA)/ Request for Proposals (RFP) ● Reviewing applications ● Developing contracts to distribute funding ● Loan servicing ● Contract monitoring ● Reporting outcomes ■ Capacity Building and Planning ● Capacity-building technical assistance ● Grant-writing ● County staff support for housing production, including the strategic use of surplus and underutilized land ● Future fund planning Comments ● No comments 4. Funding Minimums and Funding Types ○ Affordable Housing ■ Pre-Development: $25,000 ■ Everything else: $500,000 ○ Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building: $25,000 ○ Homeless Crisis Response: $25,000 ○ Loans (low interest, flexible terms ■ Capital projects (new construction and substantial rehabilitation with new affordability terms of 45+ years (homeownership), 55+ years (rental). ○ Grants ■ Housing-related services ■ Seed/innovation projects Comments ● Grant is only for a year effectively? ○ For pre-development it will be “one and done” ● Timeline for expenditure of awarded moneys? ○ Will be addressed individual RFP’s 5. Process for Funding Distribution ○ Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ■ Release NOFA and hold NOFA kickoff meeting—October ■ Applications due—December ■ Application Reviews—December-February 2023 ■ Recommendations to Committee—March-April ■ Recommendations to the Board—May ■ Award Letters Released—June ○ Homeless Crisis Response projects ■ Community involvement in NOFA design—October ■ Release NOFA: December/January ■ Applications due—January/February ■ Application Reviews—February Recommendations to Committee—March- April ■ Recommendations to the Board—May ■ Award Letters Released—June Comments ● No comments 6. Award Selection Criteria Affordable Housing ● Project Readiness ● Financial and Cost Analysis ● Developer Experience/Capacity ● Project Targeting and Characteristics Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ● Project Readiness ● Project Readiness ● Financial and Cost Analysis ● Service Provider Experience ● Impact Homeless Crisis Response ● Project Description ● Budget and Justification ● Qualifications Comments ● No comments 7. Additional Comments, Feedback, and Ideas ● No comments QUESTIONS ● Why 75%/25% breakdown? ○ Seems reasonable to some people in meeting, given how expensive it is to build ○ Housing crisis is larger than simply supply ● Are supportive services covered in HCR (25%) or DCD (75%)? ○ HCR is more immediate support ○ DCD provides more legal services, and eviction prevention services ● How do we define preservation? ● Are we preserving community housing (eg. land trust)? ● How are we preserving family housing (eg. four-plex)? ● Can AMI percentage change? ○ Unclear at this time ● Grant is only for a year effectively? ○ For pre-development it will be “one and done” ● Timeline for expenditure of awarded moneys? ○ Will be addressed individual RFP’s Contra Costa County Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Stakeholder Breakout Group 4 Notes Comments on Initial Ideas for Measure X Housing Fund Distribution (28 minutes). Stakeholders, in the time available, please share your feedback on the initial ideas presented today. You may submit additional comments to measurexhousingfund@dcd.cccounty.us through next Friday, August 19, to ensure all of your feedback is captured and considered as these ideas are refined. 1. Program Goals ○ Support the housing needs of Contra Costa County residents ■ Top priority to fund affordable housing production and preservation ○ Prioritize filling funding gaps not addressed by other sources ○ Leverage funds wherever possible ○ Explore opportunities to make the Housing Fund sustainable beyond the 20-year horizon of Measure X Comments ● Lots of important goals, sound fantastic: add goal around promoting health of community and potential residents of these units? Could NOFA/RFP include considerations for things like proximity to Air Quality/proximity to freeways and sources of pollution/PM2.5, Consider Climate Change (extreme heat/sea level rise), Tree Canopy/Green Infrastructure, EV charging (not just ready), Bike/Ped Infrastructure. ○ Will take comments to DCD and H3, but broadly - built in through federal regulations and pass-through funding, esp state funding requires these elements; can discuss if they’re required at the county level. Not to oppose the idea, but it’s hard… Example about getting HUD approval and “chemical crescent” - where are people going to live with these restrictions? 2. Funding Distribution ○ 75% of Funds for Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ■ Affordable housing for people earning up to 60% AMI AMI; focus on <50% AMI ■ Acquisition, pre-development, construction, rehabilitation, and operating and reserve funds ■ Supportive services necessary to maintain housing, including legal services and rental assistance. ■ Housing innovation pilot programs ■ Technical assistance to build capacity of non-profit housing developers and homeless service providers ■ Grant-writing ○ 25% of Funds for Homeless Crisis Response ■ Emergency and interim housing, including pilot projects Comments ● Affordable housing will be 75% of $10m - yes, that’s the proposal. Will just broaden the pool of money available in that category. Costs going up, not a lot of funding available locally. More money this cycle, will change in future. Understanding immediate goal, and figuring out more in year 2 and beyond. ○ Yes, another plug for funding stream: regional ballot measure in 2024 for $1b for affordable housing in CCC ● Glad to see pilot projects allowed in 25%; has H3 gotten to limiting what that might look like? Hoping to see non-brick and mortar, cost efficient, cost effective options for getting folks out of encampments. Hoping H3 NOFA specifically recognizes that transitional/interim housing project, innovating/pilot, would be acceptable for funding. “Tiny cabins” and cabin-type communities. ○ Likely will! 3. County Work Efforts ○ 10% of funds administered by each department (DCD and H3) will support: ■ Funding Distribution ● Administering the notice of funding availability (NOFA)/ Request for Proposals (RFP) ● Reviewing applications ● Developing contracts to distribute funding ● Loan servicing ● Contract monitoring ● Reporting outcomes ■ Capacity Building and Planning ● Capacity-building technical assistance ● Grant-writing ● County staff support for housing production, including the strategic use of surplus and underutilized land ● Future fund planning Comments ● How are accountability and oversight with regard to finances going to work with all this? ○ There will be a robust reporting measure for Measure X funding. Have chair of Measure X advisory committee here: Mariana Moore ■ Yes, the Advisory Board is deeply committed to transparency and sharing with constituents. Talking now about how to best ensure and support transparency for process and for outcomes. Please come to Measure X Advisory meetings - Next Weds ■ Gabriel Lemus with more about DCD process: monitoring and fiscal auditing requirements are part of any public source including federal fundings. Since DCD handles a lot of federal and state funding, there is a required monitoring process and agencies that oversee DCD’s work. Usually an annual audit by outside auditor, assessing what money went to what projects and how it was distributed, if sufficient documentation and done according to guidelines. ○ Clarification: Management companies say X amount of money is being spent on X project, but no one checks that they’re actually spending the money that way, or that it’s a reasonable amount for what they’re saying they’re spending. ■ Gabriel: typically, public funding is reimbursed on a cost reimbursement basis. Funds for an acquisition get put in an escrow account to ensure that requirements on both parties are met before funds are accessed. There are always receipts; public money usually isn’t fronted and often fronting it is prohibited. Aware and sensitive in administration of funds, incorporating lots of checks and balances. 4. Funding Minimums and Funding Types ○ Affordable Housing ■ Pre-Development: $25,000 ■ Everything else: $500,000 ○ Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building: $25,000 ○ Homeless Crisis Response: $25,000 ○ Loans (low interest, flexible terms ■ Capital projects (new construction and substantial rehabilitation with new affordability terms of 45+ years (homeownership), 55+ years (rental). ○ Grants ■ Housing-related services ■ Seed/innovation projects Comments ● No comments 5. Process for Funding Distribution ○ Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ■ Release NOFA and hold NOFA kickoff meeting—October ■ Applications due—December ■ Application Reviews—December-February 2023 ■ Recommendations to Committee—March-April ■ Recommendations to the Board—May ■ Award Letters Released—June ○ Homeless Crisis Response projects ■ Community involvement in NOFA design—October ■ Release NOFA: December/January ■ Applications due—January/February ■ Application Reviews—February Recommendations to Committee—March- April ■ Recommendations to the Board—May ■ Award Letters Released—June Comments ● No comments 6. Award Selection Criteria Affordable Housing ● Project Readiness ● Financial and Cost Analysis ● Developer Experience/Capacity ● Project Targeting and Characteristics Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ● Project Readiness ● Project Readiness ● Financial and Cost Analysis ● Service Provider Experience ● Impact Homeless Crisis Response ● Project Description ● Budget and Justification ● Qualifications Comments ● No comments 7. Additional Comments, Feedback, and Ideas ● Q from Joseph: Ways to continue the fund - extend bond measure or create ongoing fund: is this worth trying to do, or is it more important to fund the immediate need? ○ Funds should be spent now; pandemic, folks are suffering esp Black and brown folks, and if not now, when? The need is urgent. ● Measure X process was intense, community-driven process so far already. Disappointed with this process far, while honoring the work by County. Unlike H3 process, DCD process is missing opportunity. Measure X advisory board met weekly for a year, had vision statement and operating principles (on website) - focus on commitment to racial equity. Understand admin level of linking to federal streams, but premise of this money is doing it better, more inclusively, more focused on the needs of folks who are struggling, and because of history, morally incumbent to do it differently. ○ (not county dept) - intent is not to go through 20 years without doing more input, there is pressure to start spending it, especially with how few projects get funded each year. Structural differences between H3 and DCD, restrictions for DCD because of federal. Plan is probably not to do it this way, there will be opportunities for change. ● Echoing comments about process. Lots of elements were from community input and advisory board in Measure X process. Does breakdown represent housing element, or all of Measure X? There are things from Advisory Board that aren’t on here, disappointing. Not solving/addressing inequities and specific needs. ○ Funds are only housing portion of Measure X. Should be $120m in Measure X in Year 1, this is only housing. ○ Please send what you expected to see in it. ● Process comment: working with folks of color being displaced, often by unscrupulous means. Disproportionate emphasis on the prevention of homelessness. Appreciate that fund is both assistance and prevention; what’s the percentage between those? To align with intent of Measure X and identified needs, as need increases and feels impossible to catch up. Is there a further refinement process with more input? Worried about precedent being set in first year of funding, worth trying to get it right in the beginning. Don’t want to be cutting corners on genuine community process and creativity. ○ Use to change, but understand. Send in your comments. ○ Come to Mariana’s groups meetings (Measure X Advisory Board) ○ Plan to attend board meeting in person, zoom, send comments. ○ Funding changes year to year, need continues; should be robust discussion every year. ○ **Clarification on green highlight above: Comment from Kristi Laughlin (breakout room 4 with Joseph) in the chat- "I have a correction to the notes that were being taken in the small group session. Is there a way to correct that? I said I am concerned at over emphasis on “production” and not enough on Prevention. But that was not accurately captured. - thank you." ● With regard to Richmond, the city council seems to have no interest in paying any attention whatsoever to the input/suggestions of those who this funding is intended to benefit. They pretend to care, negotiate in bad faith, and then simply ignore our input. ● With regard to tiny homes: TESLA is now offering tiny homes for $10k each Top 3 Ideas (3 minutes): In the final minutes remaining, please identify the top 2-3 topics discussed by the group. These will be shared in a brief report out, to give everyone a sense of the breadth of ideas discussed in different groups. Note, these points will not be weighted any differently than other feedback as the ideas for the Housing Fund are refined. 1. Tracking and accountability of expenditures 2. Meshing with Advisory Committee/larger measure X goals, more input going forward not just technical advisory input; concern that we don’t get locked into what we do this year 3. Tie funding to other goals for sustainability 4. City priority in the process QUESTIONS ● Affordable housing will receive 75% of $10m? ○ yes, that’s the proposal. Will just broaden the pool of money available in that category. Costs going up, not a lot of funding available locally. More money this cycle, will change in future. Understanding immediate goal, and figuring out more in year 2 and beyond. ● Has H3 limited what types of pilot projects will be allowed in 25% of funds for homeless crisis response? ○ Not limited to brick-and-mortar ● How will accountability and oversight of funds be ensured? ○ There will be a robust reporting measure for Measure X funding. The Measure X Community Advisory Board is deeply committed to transparency and sharing with constituents, and is discussing now how to best ensure and support transparency for process and for outcomes. Monitoring and fiscal auditing requirements are part of any public source, including federal funding. Since DCD handles a lot of federal and state funding, there is a required monitoring process and agencies that oversee DCD’s work. Usually an annual audit by an outside auditor assesses what money went to what projects and how it was distributed, if there was sufficient documentation, and if it was done according to relevant guidelines. ● How will management companies be held accountable for how they spend funds and if the amounts spent are reasonable? ○ Typically, public funding is reimbursed on a cost reimbursement basis. Funds for an acquisition get put in an escrow account to ensure that requirements on both parties are met before funds are accessed. There are always receipts; public money usually isn’t fronted and often fronting it is prohibited. The administering agencies are usually aware and sensitive in administration of funds, incorporating lots of checks and balances. ● The Housing Fund includes assistance and prevention; what’s the percentage between those? ● Do the funds available here ($10m for year 1) and the breakdown represent only the housing element, or all of Measure X? ○ $10m for year one only represents the Housing Fund allocation of Measure X. ● Is there a further refinement process with more input? Contra Costa County Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Stakeholder Breakout Group 5 Notes Comments on Initial Ideas for Measure X Housing Fund Distribution (28 minutes). Stakeholders, in the time available, please share your feedback on the initial ideas presented today. You may submit additional comments to measurexhousingfund@dcd.cccounty.us through next Friday, August 19, to ensure all of your feedback is captured and considered as these ideas are refined. 1. Program Goals ○ Support the housing needs of Contra Costa County residents ■ Top priority to fund affordable housing production and preservation ○ Prioritize filling funding gaps not addressed by other sources ○ Leverage funds wherever possible ○ Explore opportunities to make the Housing Fund sustainable beyond the 20-year horizon of Measure X Comments ● A specific funding gap are loans for mobile home owners; which are sometimes not considered “real property” ● Older properties in need of rehabilitation need capital improvements to address pressing needs; some money should be set aside for renovation funds, rather than all funding going towards new units ● Renovation is needed for properties that are within flood zones; these properties are currently not included ● Rehabilitation is more cost effective than new single-family homes; co-housing could be an option as well ● QUESTION: First dollars in? Last dollars in? What is the county expecting and how can we compete for these funds? ● Time, land, etc are expensive and affordable housing developers are currently competing with market-rate housing developers // do not set a per unit cap, as this could put these affordable housing developers at a disadvantage ● Tenant protections should be added as a use for this fund: rental assistance, tenant legal services, other services as well. ● Inadequate housing, affordability issues abound and some are not able to stay in their homes 2. Funding Distribution ○ 75% of Funds for Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ■ Affordable housing for people earning up to 60% AMI AMI; focus on <50% AMI ■ Acquisition, pre-development, construction, rehabilitation, and operating and reserve funds ■ Supportive services necessary to maintain housing, including legal services and rental assistance. ■ Housing innovation pilot programs ■ Technical assistance to build capacity of non-profit housing developers and homeless service providers ■ Grant-writing ○ 25% of Funds for Homeless Crisis Response ■ Emergency and interim housing, including pilot projects Comments ● Provide tenant protection: rental assistance and legal assistance ● Temporary relocation should be an eligible use (hotels, airbnbs and extended stays are currently not an eligible use) (not eligible under CDBG) ● Hotel and motel program has been successful in the City of Concord; this should be replicated in other places and vouchers should be offered to anyone less than 50% AMI 3. County Work Efforts ○ 10% of funds administered by each department (DCD and H3) will support: ■ Funding Distribution ● Administering the notice of funding availability (NOFA)/ Request for Proposals (RFP) ● Reviewing applications ● Developing contracts to distribute funding ● Loan servicing ● Contract monitoring ● Reporting outcomes ■ Capacity Building and Planning ● Capacity-building technical assistance ● Grant-writing ● County staff support for housing production, including the strategic use of surplus and underutilized land ● Future fund planning Comments ● Costs more than 10% and this money is very necessary and crucial 4. Funding Minimums and Funding Types ○ Affordable Housing ■ Pre-Development: $25,000 ■ Everything else: $500,000 ○ Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building: $25,000 ○ Homeless Crisis Response: $25,000 ○ Loans (low interest, flexible terms ■ Capital projects (new construction and substantial rehabilitation with new affordability terms of 45+ years (homeownership), 55+ years (rental). ○ Grants ■ Housing-related services ■ Seed/innovation projects Comments ● 500,000 could be too large of an amount for a renovation; this minimum could be reduced depending on the project’s size ● The county should consider what they would like maximums to be as well ● If it’s a renovations project new terms for affordability shouldn’t be a requirement ● Safeguards should be placed so that the funds are for additional work and not just work that has already been funded ● Universal Basic Income is a good idea, and all the funds should not be tied to rent. This should be considered. 5. Process for Funding Distribution ○ Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ■ Release NOFA and hold NOFA kickoff meeting—October ■ Applications due—December ■ Application Reviews—December-February 2023 ■ Recommendations to Committee—March-April ■ Recommendations to the Board—May ■ Award Letters Released—June ○ Homeless Crisis Response projects ■ Community involvement in NOFA design—October ■ Release NOFA: December/January ■ Applications due—January/February ■ Application Reviews—February Recommendations to Committee—March- April ■ Recommendations to the Board—May ■ Award Letters Released—June Comments ● Tying this into existing housing NOFA will streamline this process. This is a good policy. ● Tie the funding award to the State tax credit calendar 6. Award Selection Criteria Affordable Housing ● Project Readiness ● Financial and Cost Analysis ● Developer Experience/Capacity ● Project Targeting and Characteristics Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building ● Project Readiness ● Project Readiness ● Financial and Cost Analysis ● Service Provider Experience ● Impact Homeless Crisis Response ● Project Description ● Budget and Justification ● Qualifications Comments ● No comments 7. Additional Comments, Feedback, and Ideas ● No comments Top 3 Ideas (3 minutes): In the final minutes remaining, please identify the top 2-3 topics discussed by the group. These will be shared in a brief report out, to give everyone a sense of the breadth of ideas discussed in different groups. Note, these points will not be weighted any differently than other feedback as the ideas for the Housing Fund are refined. 1. Rehabilitation should be emphasized - more cost effective than new single-family homes a. New affordability terms shouldn’t be a requirement for rehabilitation b. Renovation is needed for properties that are within flood zones; these properties are currently not included 2. 500,000 could be too large of an amount for a renovation; this minimum could be reduced depending on the project’s size 3. Heard some comments that like that the DCD funds will be tied to CDBG NOFA QUESTIONS ● First dollars in? Last dollars in? What is the county expecting and how can we compete for these funds? APPENDIX B. STAKEHOLDER COMMENT SUBMISSIONS From: James Cervantes Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2022 3:28 PM To: MeasureXHousingFund <MeasureXHousingFund@dcd.cccounty.us> Subject: Thursday Zoom Meeting Follow Up Thank you all for a well organized, cogent and on-time input session earlier this afternoon. As one of the District 2 representatives to the Measure X Community Advisory Board, and an advocate for the Housing Trust Fund, I appreciate the thoughtful work of County staff. While still top of mind, a few thoughts: 1.Some individuals at today’s session seem to have had questions as to how the draft Housing Trust program follows what was presented to the MXCAB. I pulled my notes from the June 30, 2021 presentation (which was excellent), and today’s outline is very consistent with the presentation. The $12 million “ask” last year was to create a fund to “build permanent housing…utilize an interdepartmental team…offer technical assistance for housing…and address homelessness prevention”. I think you’ve advance that effort. 2.I mentioned this on item on the call, but I suggest thought be given to consolidating the $10 million of first year funding (FY 2021/22) with the current fiscal year Measure X allocation. This would allow for a bigger start to the program. As I recall the timeline, by the point when recipients are awarded funds at the end of FY 2022/23, the funds should be in place. Otherwise, the $12 million of FY 2022/23 funds will just roll into the subsequent year. If the preference is to keep a funding buffer, then perhaps allocate half of FY 2022/23 to the initial round. 3.As this came up in the various groups, I think the 75/25 recommended split seems to create a fair balance. There’s no science to this, but given how expensive it is to build housing, the tilt to housing development seems appropriate. 4.Someone in our discussion group raised the question of increasing the 60% of AMI to a higher figure. As a way to better leverage funds, and create more financially sustainable developments, it may make sense to explore this. I don’t have an opinion as to whether 80% or 120% of AMI is appropriate, but it may make sense to engage with non-profit housing developers to explore what might better facilitate projects. 5.I appreciate the way you all have branded this effort: the Measure X Housing Fund. As projects roll out in the future, voters will see that the sales tax increase actually provided something of value to County residents. As a final note, I’ll be stepping off the MXCAB in the near future as I’ve been appointed to the board of the California Housing Finance Agency* and need to balance my commitments. I am glad to see that the Housing Fund is moving ahead and that County staff has this effort well in hand. If there are ways that Cal HFA’s programs can augment local efforts, I’d be interested in getting your input. Sincerely, Jim Cervantes District 2 Representative Measure X Community Advisory Board *Of course, please note that the points above are solely my opinion and do not reflect any Cal HFA position. From: Millie Phillips Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2022 4:55 PM To: MeasureXHousingFund <MeasureXHousingFund@dcd.cccounty.us> Subject: public comment Hello. Here is my public comment about the use of Measure X funds: Thank you for your informative session on Measure X funding today (8-11-22). I would like to reiterate, as did others, on the need to use some of this money (at least the $1.8 million requested earlier) for tenant legal services and also for rental assistance. I have been participating in a court watch program to observe eviction cases, and it has become very clear to me that most tenants do not know how to defend themselves or even how to fill out necessary paperwork. What minimal assistance is offered is not regular or widely publicized. People facing eviction are usually very low- income and cannot afford attorneys. Plus, there are very few non-profit attorneys available in the county and they are overloaded. Meanwhile, most landlords show up in court with attorneys, giving them a huge advantage over tenants. When tenants try to represent themsles, judges tend to encourage the use of mediation, which still requires legal advice to be effective for the tenant. Some of the cases I have observed involve uninhabitable conditions with evictions used to harass tenants when they try to get their landlords to make needed repairs, or landlords refusing to accept rent from tenants who have been served notices. If we want to prevent homelessness and displacement - and as a minister, I believe this is a moral issue, not just an economic one - we must help tenants stay in their homes whenever possible, especially in cases where they are being pushed into eviction by unethical practices. Thank you. Rev. Millie Phillips (She/Her) Faith-Rooted Organizer FAME Concord Faith Alliance for a Moral Economy (FAME) an initiative of EBASE 2140 Minert Rd, Concord CA 94518 Cell: 415 272-4152 From: Alex Werth Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 10:11 AM To: MeasureXHousingFund <MeasureXHousingFund@dcd.cccounty.us> Subject: Raise the Roof Coalition Recommendations for Measure X Housing Fund Good morning, On behalf of the Raise the Roof Coalition (RTR), I'm writing to submit a number of programmatic recommendations for the Measure X Housing Fund (MXHF). RTR's organizational members are dedicated to advancing solutions to Contra Costa County's housing, homelessness, and displacement crises that center the perspectives of impacted residents, in particular low-income renters, immigrants, and people of color. Many of our members attended the Stakeholder Meeting on August 11th, and we're collectively committed to working to ensure that the MXHF successfully meets the needs of the County's most marginalized residents by advancing all "3 Ps" (production, preservation, and protection) as well as homelessness solutions. In that spirit, we respectfully request that you consider the following recommendations as you develop your grantmaking framework in the months to come: Address Disparities in Departmental Processes: We applaud the Health, Housing, and Homeless Services Division (H3) for intentionally allotting time in the development of its funding process for more robust input from impacted groups, and we call upon the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) to take the same approach. We understand that DCD favors a more "expedited" approach in order to align HUD- and MXHF-related grantmaking processes, which could create efficiencies for DCD staff and some applicants. However, this approach continues a troubling pattern of the County steering new resources toward long-standing service providers to avoid the supposed challenges of contracting with new grantees, which prevents the County from responding to emergent housing trends, data, and solutions. This, we should note, is contrary to the stated priority of "capacity building" among potential grantees, as it may work against the very organizations best able to meet Contra Costa's housing stability and racial equity goals through programmatic innovation. If DCD is firmly committed to maintaining this approach, then we ask that staff confer with applicants and, if desired, delink MXHF from HUD dollars, as HUD stipulations and priorities may be too onerous for some grantees and inappropriate to meet emerging needs at the local level. Recognize the Integral Nature of Homelessness Prevention: Contra Costa's homelessness crisis is spiraling out of control. Between 2019 and 2022, the County experienced a 35% spike in the number of unhoused people–the biggest jump, by far, in the 9-County Bay Area. Clearly, then, addressing the causes and effects of homelessness should be the County's number one concern. Housing stability and homelessness exist on a fluid spectrum–with families moving back and forth between the two–yet public policy and funding often erect a strict division between experiences that are in fact integral with one another. Therefore, we request that you treat homelessness prevention projects as eligible for monies from both DCD and H3. Ensure Affordable Housing Production and Preservation Don't Subsume Other Needs: Contra Costa, like all Bay Area counties, is suffering from a dire shortfall in permanently affordable housing. Thus, we understand the importance of seeding a local source of affordable housing funding, which is needed to leverage additional funds from the state and federal governments. However, we are concerned that, given the limited nature of the MXHF, affordable housing production and preservation will be prioritized at the expense of homelessness prevention. In 2021, the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors endorsed AllHome's Regional Action Plan (RAP) to reduce unsheltered homelessness by 75% in three years. By endorsing the RAP, the Board was effectively endorsing AllHome's proportional funding framework, which states that, for every one unit of interim housing and two units of permanent housing, localities should invest in four units of prevention. This is because prevention strategies, like legal services and emergency rental assistance, are far and away the most cost-effective means to reduce homelessness at the scale required in Contra Costa County. In other words, while all three approaches are desperately needed, homelessness prevention strategies should be robustly funded because they provide the biggest "bang for your buck." According to DCD's current approach, however, investing in even a single new affordable development could realistically eat up most or all of the Department's allotment in a way that crowds out upstream interventions that help a much larger number of people. (For reference, the City of Concord recently invested $7.8 million from its Housing Trust Fund–an amount greater than all of DCD’s allotment for Year 1–in a single 62-unit project. By contrast, RTR estimates that Contra Costa could protect the housing security of over 1,000 households per year through an annual investment of just $1.8 million in tenant legal services.) The County should thus work with community stakeholders to set strategic and equitable funding guidelines for the MXHF, including a minimum annual percentage dedicated to homelessness prevention. Build Capacity through Sustained Investment in Emerging Service Providers: We appreciate the intention to use the MXHF to promote "capacity building" among emerging and innovative leaders in housing and homelessness. At the same time, we feel that providing technical assistance to disadvantaged community development organizations is only one way of accomplishing this goal, and one that may not be relevant to social service providers. We thus urge you to provide an option for multi- year operating assistance, rather than just granting for single years or specific projects, in order to give emerging service providers the stability needed to invest their resources in growing their capacity in Contra Costa County. Reconcile the Goals of Leveraging Funds and Covering Gaps: While the MXHF is an exciting and important new resource, it's not nearly enough to meet Contra Costa County's housing needs. We thus empathize with the County's aim of leveraging larger sources of state and federal funding whenever possible. However, we feel that this may be in tension with the stated goal of "filling funding gaps not addressed by other sources." This is because state and federal policymakers have invested unevenly across the "3 Ps." So while there may be multiple pots of money to leverage for certain projects, like affordable housing development, the same may not be true for other eligible uses, like tenant legal services. In the case of the latter, MXHF dollars are even more important precisely because the lack of a leveragable funding source points to a gap that the County should do its best to address. We thus ask that you resolve the potential for tension between these two goals by ensuring that funding requests that have no alternative resources to leverage are given due priority if they demonstrate a clear need. Clarify Parameters for Municipal Applicants: While there may be legitimate reasons for cities to apply for MXHF dollars, we request that the County clarify these scenarios and create clear parameters as to when applications from other municipalities will be considered an eligible use. We are wary of situations in which cities might turn around and regrant funds to developers and service providers who could've applied directly to the County, thus adding complexity, time, and overhead costs to the process. In addition, municipalities–in particular, larger cities and entitlement jurisdictions–have a number of ways to cultivate their own funds for affordable housing and housing services (e.g. taxes, bonds, inclusionary requirements, and more). We wouldn't want the establishment of the MXHF to cause cities to simply rely on the County, rather than leverage their own abundant resources to duly address local housing needs. Center Racial Equity: Finally, we're concerned that the program goals fail to explicitly address racial equity in any way. Again, while we understand the administrative logic of goals like leveraging outside dollars, we are left to wonder: What are the values, or the transformative visions, that are going to guide the distribution of over $200 million in much-needed funds? The omission of racial equity is especially striking when it comes to the primary goal of "supporting the affordable housing needs of Contra Costa County residents." It's evident that the MXHF will not be able to meet everyone's needs; difficult decisions will need to be made. We appreciate the emphasis on building homes for households at or below 50% of area median income (AMI). Still, more can and must be done to ensure that applicants who demonstrate a capacity to address Contra Costa's most concerning racial and spatial disparities are prioritized. To that end, we urge you to include mitigating such disparities as an explicit goal. There is ample data available to allow the County to evaluate applicants in these terms, including data on disparities in renter cost burden by race and county of residence from the Bay Area Equity Atlas and the housing precarity risk model from the Urban Displacement Project. Contra Costa has already voted to create an Office of Race and Equity. While that Office is still being established, that shouldn't deter staff from setting a strong example by centering racial equity more explicitly in the MXHF goals and implementation process. Thank you for considering these comments. RTR members look forward to continuing to engage with County staff and other stakeholders to ensure that the MXHF is the efficient, effective, and equitable resource that low-income renters, immigrants, and people of color in Contra Costa County truly need. With appreciation, Alex Werth Campaign Consultant East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy (EBASE) Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting Questions and Answers On August 11, 2022, Staff from Contra Costa County Department of Development Services (DCD); Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homeless Services (H3); and the Housing Authority held a Measure X Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting. The meeting was intended to convene stakeholders for a presentation on the initially proposed ideas for the Housing Fund and to gather their input and additional ideas. Stakeholders had a variety of questions about the Housing Fund. Following is a summary of questions received* and available answers, organized by topical areas. Note that many of the details of the Measure X Housing Fund are still being refined, so not all questions can be answered at this time. *Questions below include those asked during the meeting as well as questions submitted via email in follow up to the meeting. BACKGROUND AND ADMINISTRATION Q Who makes up the Housing Fund Staff Team? A The Housing Fund Staff team is comprised of staff from Contra Costa County Department of Development Services (DCD); Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homeless Services (H3); and the Housing Authority. Q Does this funding distribution plan apply to all of Measure X, including emergency, hospitals, fire, etc.? A The Stakeholder Meeting purpose was to discuss the approach for distributing the $10 million allocated by Measure X to the Housing Fund for year 1. The Housing Fund will support a variety of activities and services related to housing and homelessness. There are several other programs supported by Measure X, which will be administered and distributed through separate processes. Q When did collection begin on Measure X funds? How does this affect disbursal of funds? A Measure X was approved by voters in November 2020 and collection began in April 2021. The Notice of Funding Availability and Request for Proposals to be issued in 2022 will be for the first full year of funds collected, amounting to $10 million. Q How much funding is available now? A There are $10 million dollars available through year 1 of the program. There will be $12 million available per year in years 2-20 of the program. Contra Costa County Measure X Housing Fund Questions and Answers September 2022 | Page 2 Q Will the Housing Fund extend 20 years from 2021 or from 2023? A The Measure X Housing Fund will be funded $10 million in it’s first year and $12 million for the next 19 years, beginning in 2022. Currently, disbursal is envisioned to continue for 20 years from the first year of disbursal. Q Have any funds been committed to any existing projects? A No Measure X Housing Funds have been committed. Q Was the initial funding received prior to the fiscal year part of this? A No, the initial funding was used as ‘one-time’ funding. Q Is there a goal to maintain a year’s worth of reserve with the timing of this money? A Not necessarily. Q What are the timing requirements for use of funds awarded? A Timing requirements for utilization will be informed by input from Stakeholders and specified in the individual RFPs issued later this year. Q Why is the distribution of funding broken down into 75% for Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building projects and 25% for Homeless Crisis Response? A Funding is intended to remain flexible to meet the evolving housing needs of Contra Costa County residents. Projects to be administered by DCD, including affordable housing production and preservation—the program’s top priority— will receive 75% percent of funds. Projects to be administered by H3 will receive 25% of total funds. This level of funding distribution serves to distinguish DCD funding from H3 funding to enable each department to facilitate its RFP and award selection process. Q What is the funding breakdown between assistance and prevention? Or rental and ownership? A The Housing Fund Staff Team is not proposing establishing a more detailed allocation of funds beyond the split between Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building (75%), and Homeless Crisis Response (25%). Q What is the percent distribution between eligible project types within each pot of funding? A The Housing Fund Staff Team is not proposing a recommended earmark for the distribution of funds by individual categories. Instead, the distribution of funds will remain flexible to respond to needs of the county as they evolve and direct Contra Costa County Measure X Housing Fund Questions and Answers September 2022 | Page 3 funding to projects based on merit and capacity to make the biggest impact, as demonstrated in the project application. PROCESS Q How was the top priority set? What about homeless prevention as a top priority? A Affordable housing production and preservation was presented as the top priority in the initial request to the Measure X Community Advisory Board and was set as part of the approval by the Board of Supervisors in November 2021. Q Is it correct that staff is developing criteria that the Board will use in selecting projects for funding awards? If so, what is the timeline for adopting those criteria? A The Housing Fund Staff Team will go to the Board of Supervisors in September 2022 with recommendations for the Housing Fund Program funding distribution plan, informed by input from Stakeholders. Once authorized by the Board of Supervisors, staff will prepare and release the Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) and Request for Proposals (RFP) for construction projects in October 2022. The funding distribution plan for services projects will be subject to additional input from Stakeholders, then staff will prepare a NOFA and RFP to be released in late 2022. Q To what extent did community input influence the development of the priorities and criteria (e.g., testimony at Measure X Community Advisory Board meetings)? How were those criteria arrived at by the County? A The Housing Fund Staff Team worked collaboratively to develop the initial funding distribution approach presented at the August 11 Housing Fund Stakeholder Meeting, informed by past experience, input from community members, and direction from the Board, including to focus on housing unit production and take a broad approach. The Stakeholder meeting was held to present the initial ideas to the community and get input before refining the proposal for Board approval. Q Why isn’t DCD doing a community approach to RFP development, like H3? Isn’t there time to do so without disrupting the timeline? A DCD will include Measure X Housing Funds in its annual RFP for affordable housing production and preservation projects. Doing so will benefit many applicants by creating a one-stop, streamlined application, and minimize the administrative costs to the program. It would not be possible to take more time to conduct additional community engagement and include Measure X funding in the annual RFP due to federal funding requirements. Administering a separate Contra Costa County Measure X Housing Fund Questions and Answers September 2022 | Page 4 RFP for affordable housing production and preservation would cause a delay in the final release of funds. However, based on feedback, DCD is delaying RFP for services. Q Will there be additional opportunities for input to refine the funding distribution plan? A Provided the Board approves of the approach recommended in September, year 1 funding for affordable housing production and preservation will be distributed in concurrence with the annual DCD-administered NOFA, in accordance with the Board approved approach, without further input. The approach to distributing funds for services, including those administered by DCD* and H3, will be refined through additional community involvement. *The initially presented funding approach proposed all DCD-administered funding would be included in the annual NOFA administered by the Department. In accordance with input from Stakeholders at the August 11 meeting, the approach was revised to recommend that the plan to distribute DCD- administered funds for services projects be informed by additional community input, similar to what was initially presented for H3-administered fund distribution. Q How are developers being engaged in development of the funding distribution plan? A Developers were invited to participate in the August 11, 2022, Stakeholder meeting. Q How will the program ensure smaller, newer developers also have a chance at the funds? A The list of eligible projects presented to the Board of Supervisors in November 2021, when the Program was formed, included innovation and capacity building grants, which newer and smaller developers that may not have a significant track record to demonstrate capability, can more readily compete for. Q How will accountability and oversight of funds be ensured? A Funding will be issued on a reimbursement basis and recipients will be required to submit documentation and reports to ensure funds are directed to the approved project costs and that projects meet all requirements specified in the funding agreement. Q Does the NOFA process apply to acquisition and rehabilitation projects? A Yes. All funding for affordable housing production or preservation projects will be distributed through the NOFA administered by DCD. Contra Costa County Measure X Housing Fund Questions and Answers September 2022 | Page 5 ELIGIBILITY Q For the DCD-administered affordable housing production and preservation projects, can we still apply for Measure X funds if we aren’t also applying for Federal Funds? A Yes, applicants can apply for Measure X Funding only. However, DCD intends to streamline the application process, to the extent possible, to enable applicants to submit applications for multiple programs without creating an additional, unnecessary burden on applicants. Q Can cities apply for these funds? What if they have an inclusionary ordinance or affordable housing program? A Yes. Any city with an eligible project may apply for the funds. Q Will developer qualifications for the 75% of funds to be distributed for Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building projects be guided by County guidelines for CDBG + HOME? A To the extent possible, developer qualifications will be coordinated with CDBG + HOME guidelines, unless they’re preventing worthy projects from being funded. Q Are nonprofits providing direct services and homeless service providers outside of housing (e.g., mobile showers, food programs, etc.) eligible? A Yes, services are included in the proposed list of eligible projects. Q Do you need to already be receiving services to qualify for the program? A Service providers with an eligible project in Contra Costa County may apply for funding, regardless of whether they have received County funding previously. Q Under the proposed funding distribution approach, are supportive services covered in the 25% for Homeless Crisis Response or the 75% for Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building? A Depending on the specific project, supportive services could be included in the category of Homelessness Prevention OR Homeless Crisis Response. Homeless Crisis Response will fund more immediate supportive services while Homelessness Prevention would include legal services, eviction prevention services, and more. Q Will you be offering homeowner assistance? A Homeowner assistance is not included in the initially proposed list of eligible projects, which is based on the eligible projects list presented to the Board of Supervisors when the program was originally approved. Q What types of pilot projects will be eligible under 25% of funds for homeless crisis response? Contra Costa County Measure X Housing Fund Questions and Answers September 2022 | Page 6 A A pilot project funded by the homeless crisis response dollars might include, but would not be limited to, an agency expanding their offerings with funding to pilot a new program or service they do not already provide, or an agency piloting an innovative solution to serving people in the homeless crisis response system that has not previously been provided by any local agencies. Q First dollars in? Last dollars in? What is the county expecting and how can we compete for these funds? A Most federal funds have strict spend down or commitment deadlines, so the funds distributed through the annual DCD NOFA are typically treated as "gap financing" and the last money needed to make the project ready for construction. Measure X Housing Fund spend down requirements have not been firmly established at this point but will be clarified in the NOFA. OTHER QUESTIONS Q Is there any more information on the proposed operating grants through H3? Will this function like the State's capitalized operating subsidy reserve through No Place Like Home? If not, is it possible to propose such support for Permanent Supportive Housing projects? A H3 will engage with stakeholders to develop more detailed parameters for funding distribution. Q Would the County support technical assistance or would it be an intermediary (e.g., Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC))? A Technical support is an eligible project that interested applicants, such as LISC could apply for funds to administer. The County may also explore opportunities to use funds to offer technical assistance. Q Is there a plan to set aside some funds to increase the number of interim and permanent housing beds for vulnerable communities, prioritizing seniors? A There is no current target for interim and permanent housing beds for vulnerable communities set by the Measure X Housing Fund. However, this would be an eligible use of program funds. Q Richmond city council has been unwilling to identify any areas where unhoused residents might be able to create communities. Is there some way that the county can address this? A The Measure X Housing Fund is a funding program only. The County does not have control over local municipalities. Contra Costa County Measure X Housing Fund Questions and Answers September 2022 | Page 7 Q Does it have to be an individual household/family per unit or are group shared housing situations eligible? A On the construction side, household size would include everyone in the household, regardless of whether it is more than one family. This means that the income of the entire household would be reviewed to establish eligibility as opposed to each family separately. Q Are you considering opening a walk-up shelter in the County? A The County will consider all eligible projects, including emergency shelters. Q Where is rapid rehousing? A Rapid rehousing projects will fall under the Homeless Crisis Response services. Q How re preservation and capacity building being defined? A The NOFA will include definitions for preservation and capacity building Contra Costa County Measure X Housing Fund Update to Board of Supervisors September 20, 2022 Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 20222 Overview •Measure X Housing Fund Background •Review Proposed Ideas for Year 1 Housing Fund Distribution Process and Key Components of Guidelines •Next Steps •Recommended Actions Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 20223 Housing Fund Staff Team Introductions •Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) •John Kopchik, Director •Gabriel Lemus, Assistant Deputy Director, Housing and Community Improvement •Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) •Lavonna Martin, Deputy Director •Christy Saxton, Director Health, Housing, & Homeless (H3) Services •Housing Authority of the County of Contra Costa (HACCC) •Joseph Villarreal, Executive Director Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 20224 Housing Fund Background •Joint Proposal from DCD, CCHS, and HACCC •Approved by Board of Supervisors in November 2021 •Aligns with Measure X Goal 3, Healthy Communities •Year 1: $10M | Years 2-20: $12M | 20-Year total: $238 Million •Wide range of housing-related actions proposed eligible for funding •Top priority: Permanent, affordable housing for people earning <50% AMI •$5M matching grant for producing and preserving affordable housing units is pending review by State •August 11, 2022: Stakeholder meeting with over 80 Attendees •Stakeholder input reflected in proposed Year 1 program features Proposed Year 1 Program Features Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 20226 Housing Fund Program Goals •Support the affordable housing needs of Contra Costa County residents •Top priority to fund affordable housing production and preservation •Prioritize filling funding gaps not addressed by other sources •Leverage funds wherever possible •Maintain flexibility to respond to the County’s housing needs as they evolve Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 20227 Key Performance Metrics •Number of housing units to be produced or preserved affordable to households at 50% AMI or below (measures units with funding committed; other sources also contributing) •Target: 100 •Number or percent of people who receive housing-related services who secure and/or maintain permanent housing six months after receiving services •Target: 75% Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 20228 Eligible Projects •Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, and related Innovation and Capacity Building •Affordable housing; focus on <50% AMI (Acquisition, pre-development, construction, rehabilitation, and operating and reserve funds) •Supportive services necessary to maintain housing, including legal services and rental assistance •Housing innovation pilot programs •Technical assistance to build capacity of non -profit housing developers and housing service providers •Grant -writing •Homeless Crisis Response and related Innovation and Capacity Building •Emergency and interim housing, including pilot projects •Technical assistance to build capacity of homeless service providers Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 20229 Funding Distribution 75% 25% Projects to be administered and distributed by DCD Projects to be administered and distributed by H3 Affordable Housing, Homelessness Prevention, and related Innovation and Capacity Building Projects Homeless Crisis Response and related Innovation & Capacity Building Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 202210 Eligible Applicants and Target Population •Eligible Applicants •Nonprofit Organizations (including nonprofit affordable housing developers) •For Profit Developers •P ublic Agencies •Target Population* •People earning up to 50% AMI *The target does not preclude eligibility of community members earning >50% AMI •Affordable Housing dollars may fund units for residents earning up to 80% AMI •Services projects will not have a strict upper income limit for individuals served. •The Target and applicable limits will be reflected in project application criteria and scoring. Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 202211 County Work Efforts 10% of funds administered by each department (DCD and H3) will support: •Funding Distribution •Administering the notice of funding availability (NOFA)/ Request for Proposals (RFP)•Reviewing applications•Developing contracts to distribute funding •Loan servicing•Contract monitoring•Reporting outcomes •Capacity Building and Planning •Capacity -building technical assistance •Grant -writing •County staff support for housing production, including the strategic use of surplus and underutilized land •Future fund planning Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 202212 Funding Award Minimums •Affordable Housing •Pre -Development: $25,000 •Renovation and Microhome projects: $250,000 •Everything else: $500,000 •Homelessness Prevention, Innovation, and Capacity Building: $25,000 •Homeless Crisis Response: $25,000 Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 202213 Funding Types •Loans (low interest, flexible terms) •Capital projects (new construction and substantial rehabilitation with new affordability terms of 20+ years (homeownership), 55+ years (rental) •Grants •Housing-related services •Seed/innovation projects Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 202214 Funding Sources to be Included in Proposed NOFAs •Federal Funds •Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)$ 2.63M •HOME Investment Partnerships Program $ 3.6M •HOME -American Rescue Plan Program (HOME -ARP) (PENDING)$12.09M •Federal Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG)$390K •State and Local Funds •Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fees $900K •State Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG)$280K •Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention (HHAP)-3 $6M •Measure X Housing Fund $10M •State Matching Grant for Measure X Housing Fund (PENDING)$5M •TOTAL $35.9M-$40.9M Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 202215 Process for Funding Distribution Affordable Housing Projects •Integrate Measure X Housing Fund with DCD Annual NOFA •Release NOFA and hold NOFA kickoff meeting—October •Applications due—December •Application Reviews—December-February 2023 •Recommendations to Committee(s)—March -April •Recommendations to the Board—May •Award Letters Released—June Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 202216 Process for Funding Distribution Services Projects —Homelessness Prevention, Homeless Crisis Response, and related Innovation and Capacity Building •Community involvement in NOFA design—October-December •Release NOFA—December/January •Applications due—January/February •Application Reviews—February •Recommendations to Committee(s)—March -April •Recommendations to the Board—May •Award Letters Released—June Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 202217 Award Selection Criteria Affordable Housing Projects •Project Readiness •Financial and Cost Analysis •Developer Experience/Capacity •Project Targeting and Characteristics Homelessness Prevention, Homeless Crisis Response, and related Innovation and Capacity Building Projects •Project Readiness •Addresses/fills needs and gaps in system •Analysis of cost of service and leveraged resources •Experience and Qualifications •Impact, as measured by key performance indicators Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 202218 Project Monitoring and Reporting •Funding agreements will include specific reporting requirements to ensure appropriate use of funds. •Reporting requirements will necessitate service providers track outcomes of those served to inform tracking of the Housing Fund metrics. •Project funding will be subject to expenditure time limits to be specified in the NOFAs. Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 202219 Key Points •Seeking approval for year 1 funding distribution process only •No strict earmark for the way funds are distributed—will remain flexible to meet evolving needs •Community will be continually engaged in refining the program for future years Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 202220 Next Steps Housing Production Funds •Prepare and Release NOFA: Sept-Oct •Applications Due: Dec •Application Reviews: Dec ‘22-Feb Services Funds •Conduct Additional Outreach and Prepare and Release NOFA: Oct-Dec/Jan •Applications Due: Jan/Feb •Application Reviews: Feb Housing Production and Services Funds •Update to Board of Supervisors: Dec •Recommendations to Committee(s): Mar -Apr •Board Considers Award Recommendations: May •Award Letters Released: June Measure X Housing Fund| September 20, 202221 Recommended Actions •ACCEPT report on preparatory work related to the Measure X Housing Fund and the $10 million dollars available in year one. •AUTHORIZE the Housing Fund Staff Team to proceed with Notices of Funding Availability (NOFAs) and Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for various affordable housing and homelessness prevention and crisis response projects, consistent with the approach outlined in the presentation and reflecting any further direction provided by the Board.. •DIRECT the Housing Fund Staff Team to provide a progress update to the Board in December of 2022. Thank You ATTN: Clerk of the Board 17 September 2022 Supervisor John Gioia Supervisor Candace Andersen Supervisor Diane Burgis Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Supervisor Federal Glover Re Agenda Item D4: Measure X Housing Fund In 2020, during the latest nationwide “racial reckoning,” the Board of Supervisors declared racism a public health issue. And so it is. As is poverty. And homelessness. Both of these predicaments have potently synergized with systemic racism to tragic, generational, and unremitting effects. Our country, our region, our county, is at an inflection point. The recently-released 2022 PIT count reveals harrowing rates of homelessness. A 35% rise in the county overall, triple digit increases in all three areas of the county, and astronomical rises in the cities of Antioch, Pittsburg, and Richmond, again, reflective of disproportionate harms to African Americans. And there is broad consensus that PIT counts woefully underrepresent the number of people experiencing homelessness. At the same time, emergency renter assistance funds are drying up, eviction moratoriums are being lifted, rents are skyrocketing, housing production is woefully under capacity and stymied by high costs, and shelter beds and transitional housing are grossly insufficient to meet the growing need. In Antioch last month on a single day, 14 evictions were being conducted in one rental property alone. In other words, homelessness, displacement, and housing insecurity are reaching crisis levels. We are, clearly, in dire need of deep, sustainable, affordable, supportive housing with robust renter protections if we are to preserve a county that offers resources and opportunities to people of all income levels and races and ethnicities. For every 100 lowest income households, there are just 36 housing units available. And because only 1 in 4 qualifying households receives housing vouchers and those who do are routinely turned down by landlords and/or do not receive enough funds to afford our region’s high rents, most folks are now either spending an exorbitant amount of money to merely maintain a roof over their heads or are falling into chronic homelessness. In fact, most people who are homeless become so by merely missing a month or two of rent, which is happening all the more frequently given current data that shows that a shocking 61% of Americans are truly living paycheck to paycheck, with no emergency savings. This is causing both generational poverty and an entire subpopulation that is aging into homelessness, another extreme public health issue. These statistics tell a story, but not the whole one. They omit two facts: (1) these injustices fall disproportionately on African Americans in particular and other racial/ethnic groups in general and (2) municipalities can act decisively and boldly to address them. And many have. The award of Measure X dollars to support a housing fund in our county is a step in the right direction. And on that front, there are two comments in the community stakeholder meeting summary attached to this agenda that urge the program and its priorities in the right direction—that move us beyond reckoning to redress. First, we need a more explicit and actionable plan to close racial equity gaps. Second, we should implement a guaranteed income program to help lift people out of the poverty that causes homelessness in the first place (among other dire outcomes). Housing first approaches and guaranteed income programs are neither novel, outlandish, nor unproven. The first has shown incredible results across the country and the second was championed by Martin Luther King, Jr. and recently revitalized by Stockton’s former mayor, to overwhelmingly positive success. In fact, there are now more than 100 guaranteed income pilots throughout the country and more being rolled out by the day. Many of these are in the Bay Area and other parts of California. The unprecedented levels and types of assistance rolled out during the pandemic proved that direct cash payments and untethered mutual aid programs work. We need to sustain these. We can no longer deny the racial disparities at play in our lack of affordable housing, home ownership statistics, access to resources, and proneness to displacement, homelessness, and housing insecurity. This is our chance to put teeth into our “racial reckoning.” To acknowledge that systemic issues demand systemic solutions. I urge the Board to move swiftly, boldly, and decisively by (1) prioritizing considerations of racial equity in prioritizing projects and partners and (2) allocating funds from the innovations category to implement a guaranteed income program. Thank you for your consideration. Warm regards, Rachel Rosekind El Cerrito resident and business owner District 1 Library Commissioner RECOMMENDATION(S): RECEIVE update and provide direction to staff regarding juvenile justice programs, facilities and mandates in Contra Costa County. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. Presentation only. BACKGROUND: As requested during the April 2022 Budget Hearings, this is an update to the Board on juvenile justice matters overseen by the Probation Department. This includes an update on the juvenile facilities and the implementation of Senate Bills 823 and 92 as they pertain to realignment of the state Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ), and an overview of the local plan developed for youth offenders in Contra Costa County. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Board would not receive the most up to date information and will not be able to provide direction on critical issues. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS Contact: Deborah Caldwell 925-313-4188 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: , Deputy cc: D.5 To:Board of Supervisors From:Esa Ehmen-Krause, County Probation Officer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Juvenile Justice Update from the Chief Probation Officer CLERK'S ADDENDUM Speakers: Chi Chi; No name given. Written correspondence received from Lynn Mackey, Superintendent of Schools (attached). ACCEPTED the report; and DIRECTED the County Probation Officer to return to the Board on October 25, 2022 with recommendations on the possible closure of the Orin Allen Youth Facility. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Presentation - Probation Juvenile Update MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Correspondence Received 1 Secure Youth Treatment Facility: Briones Youth Academy Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) Realignment Subcommittee Impact Justice Ceres Policy Research Fresh Lifelines for Youth Dr. Monique Khumalo Secure Track Pathway Commitment Pathway Replaced Youthful Offender Treatment Program DJJ closure –June 30, 2023 2 Orientation Individualized Pathway Reentry Services & Community Supervision Briones Youth Academy Program Framework Disposition Hearing (Recommendation/Court Commitment to Program) 3 Briones Youth Academy 4 Briones Youth Academy 5 Briones Youth Academy 6 Briones Youth Academy 7 Briones Youth Academy 8 Briones Youth Academy 9 Briones Youth Academy: Community Path Intensive home-based program Community-based alternative to OAYRF commitment Less-secure “step-down” option, per SB 823 Increase capacity and expand partnership opportunities with non-governmental organizations Expose youth to greater academic and career technical educational opportunities Family stabilization and reunification services Continued use of Evidence-Based Practices 10 Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitative Facility 43 43 62 37 28 18 29 12 20 16 10 11 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 PopulationPopulation Trend Population Linear (Population) 11 Proposed Plan Future of OAYRF Transition staff to Briones program positions Fully implement Briones Youth Academy program model Explore development opportunities at Bixler Rd. site Continue preliminary planning for central youth campus in Martinez 12 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT the Capital Facilities Master Plan 2022 (CFMP 2022) outlining the 20-year vision for transforming the County facilities to support improved customer service delivery, improve support for County employees providing those services and to guide future capital facilities budgeting and planning decisions. FISCAL IMPACT: No direct fiscal impact at this time. The CFMP 2022 includes an implementation chapter which will guide future capital budgeting decisions. That chapter details proposed capital spending for the first five-year implementation period, but each fiscal year budget will have to be adopted with the required allocations during the annual budgeting cycle. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa County has not had an adopted Capital Facilities Master Plan since the Fiscal Year (FY) 1999-2000 plan was approved by the Board on January 25, 2000. On April 27, 2021, the Public Works Department issued a Request for Qualifications to solicit Statements of Qualifications ("SOQs") for Comprehensive Master Plan Services. The Public Works Department received seven SOQs from interested firms. A selection committee comprised of various County staff conducted evaluation of the SOQs and unanimously ranked and selected Gensler as the top scoring firm. At the July 13, 2021 meeting, the Board authorized staff to contract with Gensler to produce a new strategic Master Facilities Plan to guide capital planning for County departments other than Health Services and the detention facilities. Health Services has its own Facilities Master Plan which is in the process of being updated. Detention facilities are currently being examined pursuant to a consent decree and other internal planning efforts. Over the last year Gensler has conducted extensive research, surveys, and interviews with the County departments and employees in the facilities covered by the Plan. Those efforts have included: APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Eric Angstadt, 655-2042 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: D.6 To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:ADOPT the Capital Facilities Master Plan 2022 outlining the 20-year vision for transforming County facilities to support improved customer service BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) 2,177 Employee Survey Responses (35% Response Rate) 51 Sites Toured 20 Department Leadership Questionnaire Responses 22 Department Leadership Interviews Three Steering Committee Workshops (10 members) One Board of Supervisors Retreat Workshop (five members) One Board of Supervisors hearing on policy options (five members) Five Individual Board Member Interviews on District specific capital priorities 100+ County Documents, Reports, etc. In addition to Gensler’s work, and to provide a current baseline of facilities condition for the Gensler team, the County has also completed a Facilities Condition Assessment (FCA) of the entire County portfolio. The FCA was completed by Gordian, and it identifies a deferred maintenance need of $159.3 million dollars in the next five years for the 75 facilities (44 owned, 31 leased) comprising approximately 1.49 million square feet in the Master Facilities Plan. The Plan also includes 26 other facilities, measuring approximately 0.24 million square feet, where the County operates but the facility is maintained by other jurisdictions. Most of these are libraries where a city owns the building, but the County staffs the library. The total County portfolio has 274 facilities, comprising 3.79 million square feet, with a total identified five-year deferred maintenance need of $536.0 million dollars. The Master Facilities Plan includes 27% of the County facilities by count, 47% by square footage, and 30% by deferred maintenance needs. As a reminder, the vast majority of the County facilities not included in this Master Facilities Plan are in Health Services or are detention facilities. In response to this present condition, Gensler prepared three options for the Board’s consideration. These options ranged from major, transformative change to minimal change. The Board met and discussed, including taking public comment, on those options at its May 17, 2022 meeting. The Board directed staff to prepare a transformative plan to establish major service hubs in the three major regions of the County - East, Central and West - to improve customer service delivery by grouping service delivery areas in fewer, more accessible locations and to reduce the overall number of County facilities both owned and leased. The CFMP 2022 presents a 20-year future strategic vision for the capital planning and budgeting to accomplish this transition. Following the Board meeting determining the strategic vision the Board preferred, staff and the Gensler team conducted individual interviews with Board members to discuss specific district needs and priorities for inclusion in the final report. Gensler, in close coordination with the County Administrator and Finance Director, prepared a proposed financing plan to estimate the capital budgeting needs for the plan over its proposed 20-year plan horizon, with emphasis on the initial five-year implementation period. In addition to the written plan, the implementation plan also includes an electronic version of the financing model, which the County will use annually to prepare the proposed capital budget and update as parts of the plan are completed. Following the staff and Gensler’s presentation, Board questions and discussion and public comment, staff requests the Board take action to adopt the Capital Facilities Master Plan 2022 to guide future capital facilities budgeting and planning decisions. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Not adopting the Capital Facilities Master Plan 2022 will delay the establishment of a Board approved vision to guide capital facilities decisions and budget development. CLERK'S ADDENDUM Speakers: No name given. Written correspondence received from Lisa Kirk (attached). AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Facilities Master Plan Report Contra Costa County Facilities Master Plan Slide Deck MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Correspondence Received Contra Costa County | Final Report | September 2022 Capital Facilities Master Plan 2022 Property of Contra Costa County Prepared by Gensler Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors (BOS) District 1 John Gioia District 2 Candace Andersen District 3 Diane Burgis District 4 Karen Mitchoff District 5 Federal D. Glover Contra Costa County Project Team Brian Balbas Eric Angstadt James Langston Monica Nino Ramesh Kanzaria Warren Lai Contra Costa County Subconsultant Team Andrew Daw, Gordian Cathleen Ronan, Gordian Paul Brown, Gordian Contra Costa County Steering Committee Alison McKee Beth Ward Brian Balbas Debi Cooper Dennis Bozanich Esa Ehmen-Krause John Kopchik Kathy Gallager Lori Cruz Marc Shorr Marla Stuart Melinda Self Monica Carlisle Gensler & Subconsultant Project Team Aaron Hursey Ananya Kanaiya Doug Hund Julia Kan Kevin Rosenstein Kimberly Wong Manan Shah Maru Ugalde Paul Natzke Rich Yeung Thokozani Mabena Aaron Gruen, Gruen Gruen + Associates Andy Ratchford, Gruen Gruen + Associates Debra Jeans, Gruen Gruen + Associates Judy Frank, Asset Strategies Philip Mathur, Rider Levett Bucknall Contra Costa County | Final Report 01 Executive Summary 5 02 Project Scope & Assumptions 31 03 Real Estate Portfolio 47 04 Customer Experience 75 05 Employee & Department Experience 95 06 Recommendations 111 07 Implementation Guide 145 Table of Contents Interactive Document Navigation Please click on the buttons in the following pages to: The contents in all Table of Contents pages are clickeable. Go to the Overall Table of ContentsTable of Contents Go to Previous Page Go to Next Page Go to the Chapter Table of Contents Contra Costa County | Final Report 01 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Overview 6 Guiding Principles 8 Key Findings and Observations 10 Key Recommendations 12 Expected Outcomes 22 20-Year Implementation Overview 26 5-Year Implementation Overview 28 5Gensler Overview In recent years, Contra Costa County (“County”) has recognized the need to update its Capital Facilities Master Plan (“Plan”) that will provide a roadmap for two strategic objectives: improving customer service delivery, and improving utilization of real estate and facilities assets. The need to prepare a new Plan has become more pressing because of the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic had on evolving hybrid workplace patterns and policies. The Plan described here is meant to provide guidance to decision-making on capital improvements for the next 20 years. More specifically, the Plan addresses: »Future facility recommendations »Technology and the workplace »Service delivery needs and opportunities »Capital planning and facilities maintenance needs »Implementation and phasing practicalities Contra Costa County | Final Report Public Ways & Facilities Education General Government Region Boundaries Public Assistance Public Protection Other Source: ESRI, Contra Costa County 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, Contra Costa County. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Exhibit 1.1. Current Contra Costa County Facilities Map by Functional Group WEST CENTRAL EAST 7Gensler Executive Summary - Overview Guiding Principles The County and Gensler Project Team (“Project Team”) developed five guiding principles as the main drivers for the Plan. These principles were derived from workshops with the project Steering Committee and Board of Supervisors (“BOS”) to define the future vision for County service delivery and facilities. Contra Costa County | Final Report Improve equity, access to services, and the overall customer experience Provide flexibility, upgrade work spaces, and improve the overall employee experience Reduce facility and real estate-related costs Continue to increase technology adoption 01 04 02 05 03 Increase collaboration and resource sharing between departments 9Gensler Executive Summary - Guiding Principles Key Findings and Observations The County portfolio included in the Plan is large, distributed, and diverse, with approximately 1.81 million square feet of owned and leased facilities across 110 individual facilities. Key customer and employee experience factors were evaluated to determine the future needs and ideal locations for County facilities. Key Facts 2020 Employee Headcount 4,041 2030 Projected Headcount 4,819 Departments 21 Square Feet 1.81M 2020 County Population 1,165,927 2030 Projected Population 1,244,173 Population at Poverty Level 8.2% Population 65 Years & Over 15.8% Facilities 110 Owned Facilities 63% Operating Costs* $90M *3.5% annual discount rate applied to future costs. Contra Costa County | Final Report Customer Experience Employee Experience Real Estate Portfolio »Population growth was 11% between 2010 and 2020, with the highest growth in East County. 7% growth is projected through 2030. »Facilities aren’t always proximate to the populations needing County services, especially in East County. »Public transit to reach County facilities is poor, car commutes are long, and not all facilities have dedicated visitor parking. »Most departments occupy individual facilities, requiring customers to travel to multiple location to access services. »Most facilities are rated as average by occupants; lack of privacy, overcrowding, and insufficient storage are key issues. »Office facilities were likely underutilized pre-COVID. »Gordian’s Facility Condition Assessment identified needs for improvements to County facilities. »Expenses grew by 29% for leased office properties and 9% for owned office space over the three-year period between Fiscal Year 2018 and 2021, suggesting work-from-home policies did not result in operating expense savings. »All leases will have expired by the year 2035. »County employees are collaborative and service-oriented but can be better supported with improved adjacencies to complementary departments when in the office. »Employees want more remote work opportunities than the County’s current policy allows. »Most employees currently commute via car, but want to explore other transit options in the future. »Department leaders project that overall employee headcount will grow by 19% by 2030. Source: US Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; 2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; California Department of Finance. Demographic Research Unit. Report P-2A: Total Population Projections, California Counties, 2010-2060 (Baseline 2019 Population Projections; Vintage 2020 Release). Sacramento: California. July 2021. 11Gensler Executive Summary - Key Findings and Observations Key Recommendations Strengthen Safety and Security Support Housing Development 07 08 Support Flexible Work Introduce Modern and Efficient Space Standards Expand Virtual and Mobile Services for Customers 04 05 06 Collocate Complementary Departments at Regional Service Centers Consolidate Portfolio and Optimize Facility Management 01 02 03 Improve Customer and Employee Spaces Eight general recommendations emerged from this study and should be considered across the portfolio. In addition, the need for four new County service centers was identified. Contra Costa County | Final Report Recommended New County Service Centers East County Service Center Technology Way, Brentwood The County’s vacant parcel in Technology Way, Brentwood, has been selected for the East County Service Center, because: »Significant vacant land for development »Convenient location for customers throughout East County »Proximate to retail »Well-liked location that was considered for a Regional Service Center in 2011 West County Service Center San Pablo Ave Corridor A location in the San Pablo Avenue corridor (to be acquired) proximate to the West County Health Clinic is preferred for the West County Service Center. »Proximate to bus stops and freeway »Easily identifiable location where customers access a variety of services in one location Planning, Development, and Storage Center Waterbird Way, Martinez Central County Service Center Arnold Dr, Martinez The Waterbird Way campus has been selected for the Planning, Development, and Storage Center, because: »Large parcel acreage with significant vacant land for development »High concentration of PWD and Animal Services staff already present, requiring less change »Central location for departments to access storage 2530 Arnold Drive, Martinez has been selected as the ideal location for the Central County Service Center, because: »Large parcel acreage with significant vacant land for development »Proximate to bus stops »Well-liked location that was considered for the County Administration building »High concentration of County staff already present Departments Recommended: PUBLIC ASSISTANCE »Employment & Human Services »Veterans Service GENERAL GOVERNMENT »Clerk-Recorder Departments Recommended:Departments Recommended:Departments Recommended: PUBLIC ASSISTANCE »Employment & Human Services »Veteran Services PUBLIC PROTECTION »District Attorney »Child Support Services »Probation GENERAL GOVERNMENT »Assessor »Information Technology »County Administrator’s Office (PBX Case Management) »Risk Management PUBLIC ASSISTANCE »Employment & Human Services »Veterans Service PUBLIC PROTECTION »Public Defender GENERAL GOVERNMENT »Clerk-Recorder PUBLIC PROTECTION »Agriculture »Conservation & Development PUBLIC WAYS AND FACILITIES »Public Works OTHER (STORAGE) »Multiple departments EDUCATION »Library Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 13Gensler Executive Summary - Key Recommendations West County Service Center at San Pablo Avenue Corridor (Location TBD) 01 A new multi-department facility near San Pablo Avenue will be closer to West County customers, employees, and more public transit service providers. This option allows the County to dispose of multiple properties in Richmond, consolidate complementary EHSD and Veterans Service functions, and provide an outpost for Clerk-Recorder. Goals Recommendations »Support a “one-stop shop” for West County Public Assistance services »Reduce number of facilities in the County’s portfolio »Improve workspaces and the overall employee experience »Acquire a new site along San Pablo Ave Corridor, preferably near the West County Health Center to help customers access a range of services in one location. »Relocate EHSD and Veterans Service employees from 1275 Hall Ave, 1535 Fred Jackson Way, 1305 MacDonald Ave, and 2101 Vale Rd to the new site. »Develop a common customer reception space with multiple service counters, if possible, to educate customers on the variety of services available and to optimize space utilization. »Consider providing a shared service counter and drop-in spaces for other services that may not need to be available all days of the week, e.g. Auditor Controller. »Consider outdoor and indoor public spaces like retail, event spaces, etc., that can help activate the service center, benefit the community, and provide the County alternate sources of revenue. »Consider providing open workspaces and shared amenity and storage spaces for all employees unless they need to be separated for confidentiality reasons. »Consider supportive housing or other uses for 1305 MacDonald Ave. »Demolish/expand 1305 MacDonald Ave, Richmond to accommodate the program ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATIONS 158 STAFF Moving from leased facilities 218 STAFF Moving from owned facilities EHSD EHSD Veterans Service Exhibit 1.2. Staff Moves 376 TOTAL STAFF Contra Costa County | Final Report DEPARTMENT 2020 STAFF 2030 STAFF REMOTE % 2030 SEATS New Facility; Construct; 85K SF (seat sharing) - 118K SF (no sharing) EHSD 374 40%250 Clerk-Recorder TBD 0%TBD Veterans Service 2 0%2 Total Parking Stalls Needed: 340 - 472 (County Code) DISPOSED FACILITIES DEPARTMENT OWNERSHIP 1275 Hall Ave, Richmond EHSD Leased 1535 Fred Jackson Way, Richmond EHSD Leased 2101 Vale Rd, San Pablo Veterans Service Leased 1305 MacDonald Ave, Richmond EHSD Owned Exhibit 1.3. West County Service Center Campus Map (Size TBD)Exhibit 1.4. West County Service Center Campus Program Exhibit 1.5. Disposed Facilities (staff relocated to West County Service Center) Sa n P a b l o A v e 1 mi radiu s West County Health Center Buses AC Transit 15Gensler Executive Summary - Key Recommendations 1 Chart Title Central County Service Center at 2530 Arnold Drive, Martinez 02 Leverage the vacant parcel adjacent to 2530 Arnold Drive and position the campus as the Public Assistance and Protection hub for Central County. This option will consolidate staff from other Martinez facilities, allowing the County to dispose 10 leased and owned facilities. Goals Recommendations »Support a “one-stop shop” for Central County Public Assistance and Protection services »Reduce number of facilities in the County’s portfolio »Respond to housing demand »Leverage the vacant land adjacent to 2530 Arnold Drive to consolidate staff from facilities dispersed across Martinez. »Ensure sufficient wayfinding and privacy to accommodate the variety of public and non-public-facing departments recommended for this service center. »Provide shared customer reception, amenity, and storage spaces for complementary departments. »Update the existing facility at 2530 Arnold Drive to accommodate modern and efficient workplace standards and growing headcount. »Ensure sufficient security from climate and disaster for the Data Center. Consider sustainable and energy efficient sources to maintain the Center. »Consider outdoor and indoor public spaces like retail, co-working spaces, etc., that can help activate the campus, benefit the community, and provide the County alternate sources of revenue. »Convert the land that may not be needed for County use at 2530 Arnold Drive and vacated Douglas Drive to other uses. »Relocate Library Administration to this Service Center »Develop this program at the Douglas Drive, Martinez campus and convert Arnold Drive, Martinez into housing ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATIONS 256 STAFF Moving from leased facilities 614 STAFF Moving from owned facilities 217 STAFF Growing in place EHSD DCSS Probation EHSD DoIT DA, Veterans Service EHSD Assessor Risk Management Exhibit 1.6. Staff Moves 1,087 TOTAL STAFF DA & CAO Contra Costa County | Final Report Surface Parking Ground- Mounted Solar Buses (0.1 mi) Tri Delta Transit State Hi g h w a y 4 Arnold Dr P a c h e c o B l v d 2530 Arnold FCI=0.325 EHSD, Assessor, Risk Management Potential Development Area DEPARTMENT 2020 STAFF 2030 STAFF REMOTE % 2030 SEATS Existing Facility; Densify; 115,091 SF Assessor 112 132 40%88 EHSD 50 50 40%33 Risk Management 30 35 0%35 New Facility; Construct; 173K SF (seat sharing) - 253K SF (no sharing) EHSD 435 40%290 DoIT 130 60%52 Probation 105 40%70 DCSS 135 40%90 Veterans Service 10 60%4 DA 49 0%49 PbK Staff (EHSD & DA)6 0%6 Drop-In Workspaces 10 0%10 Total Parking Stalls Needed: 692 - 1,012 (County Code) DISPOSED FACILITIES DEPARTMENT OWNERSHIP 10 Douglas Dr, Martinez Veterans Service, DA Owned 30 Douglas Dr, Martinez DoIT Owned 40 Douglas Dr, Martinez EHSD Owned 50 Douglas Dr, Martinez Probation, DCSS Owned 4071 Port Chicago Hwy, Concord EHSD Leased 1470 Civic Dr, Concord EHSD Leased 3755 Alhambra, Martinez EHSD Leased 1875 Arnold Dr, Martinez EHSD Leased 1330 Arnold Dr, Martinez DA, CAO Leased 2600 Stanwell, Concord EHSD Leased Exhibit 1.7. Arnold Drive Campus Map (20.82 Acres)Exhibit 1.8. Arnold Drive Campus Program Exhibit 1.9. Disposed Facilities (staff relocated to Arnold Drive Campus) 17Gensler Executive Summary - Key Recommendations PWD PWD DCD Animal Services Library Agriculture DCD Planning, Development and Storage Center at Waterbird Way, Martinez 03 Renovate existing facilities and build new facilities for Agriculture, Conservation & Development, and Public Works staff at Waterbird Way, Martinez. Public Works can consolidate operations, storage, fleet, and staff at a single location by redeveloping and expanding the existing site. Multiple properties can be disposed of for alternative uses. Goals Recommendations »Support a “one-stop shop” for Public Works, Conservation & Development, and Agriculture »Reduce number of facilities in the County’s portfolio »Improve workspaces and the overall employee experience »Increase resource sharing and storage between departments »Leverage the vacant land at Waterbird Way currently occupied by ground mounted solar and leased to other organizations to support staff from PWD and other complementary departments. Consider the total 27.46 acre parcel that includes 4800 Imhoff Pl, and develop a new site master plan to more efficiently use the parcel. »Introduce a multi-department storage facility to consolidate storage dispersed across the County in leased and owned facilities. Consider including storage from Sheriff and Health Service departments. »Accommodate departments with significant storage and fleet needs at this Center, such as Agriculture and Library Administration, and provide shared resources. »Consolidate Public Works and Conservation and Development staff to maintain productive adjacencies while reducing the quantity and dispersal of facilities. »Conduct needs assessment for Animal Services before making major improvements to their existing facility at 4800 Imhoff Pl or expanding to East and West County. »Consider housing or other uses for the 30-40 Muir Rd and 220-255 Glacier Dr facilities and parcels. »Develop this program at the 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez campus and convert Arnold Drive, Martinez into housing ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATIONS 107 STAFF Moving from leased facilities 371 STAFF Moving from owned facilities Exhibit 1.10. Staff Moves 328 STAFF Growing in place 806 TOTAL STAFF Contra Costa County | Final Report DEPARTMENT 2020 STAFF 2030 STAFF REMOTE % 2030 SEATS Existing Facilities; Densify; 98,196 SF Public Works 206 220 0%220 Animal Services 71 108 40%72 New Office; Construct; 140K SF (seat sharing) - 164K SF (no sharing) Agriculture 47 0%47 DCD 185 40%124 Public Works 191 0%191 Library 55 60%22 New Storage Facility; Construct; 24K SF Total Parking Stalls Needed: 803 - 899 (County Code) DISPOSED FACILITIES DEPARTMENT OWNERSHIP Phase 1: Storage Facility 2250 Galaxy Ct, Concord Clerk-Recorder Leased 220 Glacier Dr, Martinez Multiple - Storage Owned 255 Glacier Dr, Martinez Public Works Owned All External Storage Multiple Leased Phase 2: Office Facility 40 Muir Rd, Martinez DCD, Public Works Owned 30 Muir Rd, Martinez DCD, Public Works Owned 2380 Bisso Lane, Concord Agriculture Leased 255 Glacier Dr (Main Bldg), Martinez Public Works Owned 255 Glacier Dr (Bldg 500), Martinez Public Works Owned 3685 Mt Diablo Blvd, Lafayette DCD Leased 4061 Port Chicago Hwy, Concord Public Works Leased 777 Arnold Dr, Martinez Library Leased Exhibit 1.11. Waterbird Way Campus Map (27.46 Acres)Exhibit 1.12. Waterbird Way Campus Program Exhibit 1.13. Disposed Facilities (staff relocated to Waterbird Way) Surface Parking Buses (0.5 mi) County Connection Land Currently Leased To Others 2483 Waterbird PWD Imhoff Dr Waterbird WayBenita Way I- 6 8 0 4785 Blum FCI=0.365 PWD 2467 Waterbird FCI=0.473 PWD 2475 Waterbird FCI=0.349 (Bldg A) FCI=0.237 (Bldg B) FCI=0.597 (Bldg C) PWD 2471 Waterbird FCI=0.774 PWDBlum RdPotential Development Area (Currently Ground- Mounted Solar) Potential Development Area 4800 Imhoff Pl FCI=0.238 (Shelter) FCI=0.195 (Barn) Animal Services 19Gensler Executive Summary - Key Recommendations East County Service Center at Technology Way, Brentwood 04 A new Service Center at this location will be more proximate to the growing populations in far East County. This allows the County to update Delta Fair to modern office furniture standards, consolidate EHSD Call Center and complementary EHSD and Veterans Service functions in Brentwood, and provide outposts for the Clerk- Recorder and Public Defender. Goals Recommendations »Support a “one-stop shop” for East County Public Assistance and Protection services »Reduce number of facilities in the County’s portfolio »Improve workspaces and the overall employee experience »Leverage the vacant parcel at Technology Way to build a new Service Center to better serve the dispersed and underserved population of East County. »Consolidate staff from facilities proximate to this location to optimize the County’s real estate portfolio. »Relocate 31 Public Defender staff from 800 Ferry St that currently serve the East County to this Center to minimize customer travel. »Develop a common customer reception space with multiple service counters, if possible, to help customers easily learn about the variety of services available and to optimize space utilization. »Develop this program at the Delta Fair, Antioch campus and convert Technology Way, Brentwood into housing ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATIONS 26 STAFF Moving from leased facilities 190 STAFF Moving from owned facilities PD EHSD EHSD Veterans Service Exhibit 1.14. Staff Moves 216 TOTAL STAFF »Consider outdoor and indoor public spaces like retail, event spaces, etc., that can help activate the campus, benefit the community, and provide the County alternate sources of revenue. »Provide sufficient drop-in focus and collaboration spaces to accommodate at least 10 employees from other departments not included in this site program, to use as needed. This provides an opportunity for County employees to work closer to their homes when needed. »Consider housing or other uses for the 1650 Cavallo Road facility and parcel. Contra Costa County | Final Report DEPARTMENT 2020 STAFF 2030 STAFF REMOTE % 2030 SEATS New Facility; Construct; 56K SF (seat sharing) - 71K SF (no sharing) EHSD 184 40%123 Clerk-Recorder TBD 0%TBD Public Defender 31 0%31 Veterans Service 1 0%1 Total Parking Stalls Needed: 224 - 284 (County Code) DISPOSED FACILITIES DEPARTMENT OWNERSHIP 1650 Cavallo Rd, Antioch EHSD Owned 151 Sand Creek Rd, Brentwood EHSD Leased 3361 Walnut Blvd, Brentwood Veterans Service Leased Exhibit 1.15. Technology Way Campus Map (2.82 Acres) Exhibit 1.17. Disposed Facilities (staff relocated to Technology Way) Technology WayBus Center DrTechnology CtSchool Industrial Park Office Buildings Commercial Store Vacant Land Mini-Warehouse Potential Development Area Exhibit 1.16. Technology Way Campus Program Buses (0.2 mi) Tri Delta Transit 21Gensler Executive Summary - Key Recommendations Expected Outcomes Implementation of the recommendations will reduce the number of facilities by 20% and the total square footage by 7% while accommodating 19% more staff (assuming the implementation of seat sharing). Distribution of ownership will increase by 20%. Benefits Challenges Customer Experience »Improved and equitable customer experience across Central, East, and West with Service Centers as one-stops for multiple County services »Better proximity to East County customers for District Attorney, Public Defender, and Clerk Real Estate Costs »26% reduction in annual lease facility operating costs »7% less SF needed due to denser furniture standards and seat sharing »Easier facility maintenance with reduced facilities and addresses »Significant construction and renovation costs »High-level of consolidation may not be supported by some departments »Phased construction is necessary to minimize service disruptions, which may cause some operational disruptions Critical Factors for Success »Long-term financing model for CAPEX and OPEX »Integrated organizational structure for real estate, capital improvements, and facility management »Change management to assist employees with transitions »Continuous customer and employee feedback and facility improvements »12 owned facilities and 19 leased facilities can be vacated for other uses Collaboration & Sharing »Better collaboration and resource sharing between departments through service centers Employee Experience »Supports employee desire for increased remote work Contra Costa County | Final Report *3.5% annual discount rate applied to future costs. Source: Contra Costa County Public Works Asset Management Inventory, Gensler CAPEX & Occupancy Costs Estimates. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Ownership Base Case Key Stats Portfolio by Ownership Square Feet Facilities CAPEX 1.81M sf 110 $32.7M 2020 Staff Headcount (4,041) Occupancy Costs* $444.3M Master Plan Key Stats Portfolio by Ownership Square Feet CAPEX 1.68-1.83M sf $747.8M 2030 Staff Headcount (4,819) Ownership Owned: 63%Owned: 76%Leased: 24% Leased: 12% City/State/School Owned: 13% City/State/School Owned: 13% 23Gensler Executive Summary - Expected Outcomes County Owned County Leased City/State/School District Owned Current Real Estate Portfolio Map (110 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 CountySonoma County Marin County San Francisco County San Mateo County City/State/School Owned County Owned County Leased Region Boundaries Source: ESRI, Contra Costa CountyNote: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. WEST CENTRAL EAST Contra Costa County | Final Report County Owned ( Service Centers)County Owned Proposed Future County Facilities City/State/School Owned County Owned County Leased Region Boundaries 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 CountySonoma County Marin County San Francisco County San Mateo County !!!! ! ! !!!! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! A D B C A County Leased City/State/School District Owned Vacated/Disposed Recommended Real Estate Portfolio Map (88 Facilities) Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. WEST CENTRAL EAST 25Gensler Executive Summary - Expected Outcomes 20-Year Implementation Overview 20 YearsExhibit 1.18. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 All Service Centers are recommended to be constructed in the next 15 years to meet service needs and eliminate facilities no longer needed before incurring major renovations. Major improvements for facilities that will be maintained in the portfolio are distributed across the 20 year span. Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. New construction at the Service Centers comprise 64% ($481.7M) of the total capital expenses without shared seating. Shared seating lowers it to 58% ($364.7M)*. *Seat sharing assumptions are discussed in Chapter 6 Recommendations of this report. Construction (64%) Current: $481.7M Tenant Improvements (31%) Current: $230.3M Refresh (5%) Current: $35.8M Total CAPEX: $747.8M Total CAPEX: $630.8M (16% reduction) (WITHOUT SEAT SHARING) (WITH SEAT SHARING AT SERVICE CENTERS) Contra Costa County | Final Report East County Service Center Funding for Central County Planning & Storage Center Phase 1 Funding for Central County Planning & Storage Center Phase 2 Funding for West County Service Center Exhibit 1.19. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Funding for Central County Service Center Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend 27Gensler Executive Summary - 20-Year Implementation Overview 5-Year Implementation Overview 5 Years »Construct the East County Service Center. »Construct the storage facility at the Central County Planning, Development, and Storage Center. »Initiate FCI-related improvements to facilities with FCI scores of 0.5+. »Begin tenant improvements to existing facilities that will be maintained in the portfolio for 20+ years, since most facilities haven’t undergone recent improvements. »Refresh existing facilities that will be disposed in 6-20 years. Key Actions Exhibit 1.20. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 5 Construction (49%) Current: $62.5MTenant Improvements (28%) Current: $36.3M Refresh (23%) Current: $29.9M Total CAPEX: $128.7M (9% reduction with shared seating) The first five years will be focused on creating the East County Service Center, densifying existing facilities for anticipated headcount growth, and renovating buildings in the worst condition. 17% of the County’s capital expenses will be incurred between Years 1-5. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 1.21. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 5 YEAR YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 Construction $0.0M $0.0M $62.5M $0.0M $0.0M Renovation (TI + Refresh)$0.9M $16.2M $16.9M $17.0M $15.2M CAPEX $0.9M $16.2M $79.3M $17.0M $15.2M Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 29Gensler Executive Summary - 5-Year Implementation Overview Contra Costa County | Final Report 02 PROJECT SCOPE & ASSUMPTIONS Project Priorities 32 Process 34 Methodology 36 Departments 38 Assumptions 40 Definitions 44 31Gensler Project Priorities During the initial strategic visioning session with the Project Team and Steering Committee, several key priorities were identified that support the County’s decision to develop a County Facilities Master Plan now. Contra Costa County | Final Report Priority Issues and Facilities »The real estate portfolio is perceived as inefficient and excessive - disposition may need to be explored. »Facility conditions vary across the portfolio - consider a proactive approach for ongoing maintenance needs. »The County needs a clear process and procedure to identify where to focus capital improvement resources. »In-person access to County services is challenging due to geography and commute times - service delivery alternatives should be explored. »The stay-at-home orders transformed service delivery and remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic - departments will need to rethink how their staff serve the community in the future. 33Gensler Project Scope & Assumptions - Project Priorities Process PHASE 2PHASE 1 PROJECT START-UP DATA COLLECTION Our five-part project process helped uncover the key objectives and insights for improving service delivery and real estate and facility asset utilization in the County. Overview Phase 1 focused on setting and aligning project vision and stakeholder expectations. Phase 2 centered on understanding County staff, operations and facilities through various data collection activities. Phase 3 covered a deep- dive analysis of projected headcounts, department adjacencies, facility needs/ costs, and service delivery needs to identify potential improvement opportunities. Phase 4 involved developing multiple master plan option scenarios for consideration. Phase 5 synthesized our recommendations and implementation guide in a final report. Project Start-Up Employee Survey Site Tours Leadership Interviews Department Questionnaire MILESTONES Steering Committee Workshop #1: Strategies Kick-Off Meeting Sept 2021 Oct Nov Dec Team Organization Background Materials Review Kick-Off Meeting Data Collection Methodology Project Strategies Workshop Contra Costa County | Final Report n PHASE 3 PHASE 4 PHASE 5 ANALYSIS & FINDINGS OPTIONS DEVELOPMENT FINAL FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Draft & Final Reports Financial Analysis Develop Suitable Alternatives Additional Research & Synthesis Supply/ Demand Analysis Financial Evaluation Macro Programming Caseload/ Employee Commute Analysis Ongoing Project Team Communication Internal Findings Workshop Steering Committee Workshop #2: Findings Internal Options Workshop BOS Interviews Draft Report Review Final Report/ Presentation Feb AprilJan 2022 March May June Executive Summary Project/Process Narrative Planning & Development Principal Options Analysis Recommendations Implementation Guide Revenue Opportunities Construction Costs Site Infrastructure Costs Total Occupancy Costs Customer-Facing Needs Headcount Growth Critical Adjacencies Adoption of Remote Work Storage Drive Time Public Transportation Private Transportation Parking Impact Existing Facilities Projected Needs Service Delivery Workflow Owned Facilities Leased Facilities Current Operating Costs Total Current Occupancy Costs 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 BOS Presentation: Options AugustJuly BOS Presentation: Options 35Gensler Project Scope & Assumptions - Process Methodology The project process included the following data collection and stakeholder engagement activities to help inform and guide the recommendations in this report. The Project Team’s approach also drew from findings and lessons learned from Gensler’s previous county clients. Employee Survey (Electronic - Oct 2021) Questions about the effectiveness of the current work environment and impact of remote work. Background Materials Review (Electronic - Sept & Oct 2021) Collection of relevant background materials and critical data for review and use throughout the project. Steering Committee Workshops (Electronic - Oct 2021, Feb & May 2022) Ongoing work sessions with senior County stakeholders at key milestones to build consensus, provide guidance, and validate progress. Contra Costa County | Final Report Data Collection Board of Supervisor Meetings (Electronic & In-Person - Jan, May & Aug 2022) Presentations and discussions of the project strategy and vision, key findings, and strategic options to the Board of Supervisors. Board of Supervisor Interviews (Electronic - June 2022) Discuss about strategic options for County facilities and opportunities within supervisor districts. Department Leadership Interviews (Electronic - Nov 2021) Discussions about the collected data, high-level opportunities, and challenges. Site Tours (In-Person - Dec 2021 & Feb 2022) Review of layout efficiencies, suitability for the current user, technology, vacancy, overcrowding, storage, and other relevant factors. Facility Conditions Assessment (In-Person - Fall 2021 to March 2022) Observation-based assessments by Gordian that provide a comprehensive understanding of facilities and necessary maintenance needs. 2,177 Employee Survey Responses (35% Participation Rate) 20 Department Leadership Questionnaire Responses 2 Steering Committee Workshops (10 members) 52 Sites Toured 21 Department Leadership Interviews 3 Board of Supervisors Meetings (5 members) 5 Board of Supervisor Interviews 100+ County Documents, Reports, Materials, etc. Reviewed Department Leadership Questionnaire (Electronic - Oct 2021) Questions about the department’s function, mission, service delivery, functional adjacencies, and facility needs. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 37Gensler Project Scope & Assumptions - Methodology Departments General Government »Assessor »Auditor-Controller »County Administrator’s Office (“CAO”) »County Counsel »Clerk-Recorder (“Clerk”) »Human Resources (“HR”) »Information Technology (“DoIT”)* »Risk Management* »Tax Collector Treasurer Departments within each of the five functional groups have differing priorities when it comes to adjacencies and delivering services to the community. Note that several departments and functions were excluded from this study, including Health Services, Sheriff, Fire, detention facilities and Employment & Human Services Head Start facilities. Central administrative staff are concentrated in Central County, with most operations located in the new government center in downtown Martinez. * Note: Information Technology and Risk Management are divisions with the County Administrator’s Office but counted as departments for the purposes of this study. Contra Costa County | Final Report Public Protection Public Assistance Public Ways and Facilities »Agriculture / Weights & Measures (“Agriculture”) »Child Support Services (“DCSS”) »Conservation & Development (“DCD”) »District Attorney (“DA”) »Probation »Public Defender (“PD”) »Animal Services »Public Works (“PWD”) »Employment & Human Services (EHSD) »Veterans Service Education »Library These departments are close to the Superior Court or based elsewhere in Martinez but serve residents from all regions. Employment & Human Services and Veterans Service offer assistance programs throughout the County. Access is critical for face-to- face client interactions. Both departments occupy main offices in Central County and offer field services in other regions. They have heavy equipment, specialty space, and storage needs. Libraries are open to the public, staffed by County employees and distributed across cities and unincorporated areas throughout all regions. 39Gensler Project Scope & Assumptions - Departments Assumptions The findings, analysis, and recommendations in this report are based on information provided by the County and validated through discussions with the Project Team, Steering Committee, and BOS. The assumptions listed below are factored into the recommendations and implementation plan. General »The County will adopt the guiding principles. »Service delivery refers to physical service (in- person at a physical County address), field service (in- person at a non-County or customer address) or virtual service (via online website, telephone, fax, mail, email or video conference). »Virtual service delivery will continue and potentially expand. »Owned properties are prioritized when considering facilities to maintain. »Plans for new facilities will remain intact, unless otherwise stated. »The fastest population growth is in East County. »Future population increases are based in part on the 2020 County population estimates from 2020 Decennial Census and the 2030 population projections (baseline 2019) from the State of California Department of Finance. »2030 headcount projections were provided by department leadership. »Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. »Capital expenditure (“CAPEX”), operating expenses (“OPEX”), Facility Condition Index (“FCI”), service delivery and access were considered. »The County expands the remote work policy and adopts seat sharing. Contra Costa County | Final Report Implementation »Pre-Work: Planning associated with facility improvements, construction, and disposals. This could include detailed facility programs, site master planning, design development, etc. Costs not assumed. »Construction costs assumptions (2021 dollars): • Office facilities = $650/SF • Storage = $325/SF • Parking = $30,000/ Stall (per County code, 1 Stall per 400 SF is required for professional offices and 1 Stall per 1,000 SF is required for storage) »Tenant Improvements: A variety of improvements, including space planning, hard wall construction, paint and carpet, key system improvements, etc. Includes FCA recommended improvements for facilities with FCI score of 0.5+. • General tenant improvements (office and non-office facilities) = $185/SF • Furniture, fixtures, and equipment improvements (office facilities) = $75/SF • FCA recommended improvements = costs for facilities with FCI score of 0.5+ obtained from “20220315 Asset List CCC from Gensler Rev 20220725” sent by Gordian to Gensler on July 25, 2022. Space Requirements »Workspace standards for office facilities = 190 usable square feet per seat (“USF/ seat”)/230 gross square feet per seat (“GSF/seat”). »New build for office facilities = 190 usable square feet/230 gross square feet per seat, additional collaboration space for departments implementing seat sharing, and additional 25% contingency on total square feet proposed. »Usable square feet = 75% of gross square feet. »A 5% gross-up factor was applied to the rentable square footage of leased facilities in order to arrive at gross square feet. »Office utilization metrics include workspace, collaboration spaces and support spaces, and exclude specialty and core spaces. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 41Gensler Project Scope & Assumptions - Assumptions Implementation (Continued) »Refresh costs: Includes minimal improvements to facilities that will eventually be disposed in the 20-year plan (2021 dollars): • Paint and carpet improvements = $65/ SF • Furniture, fixtures, and equipment improvements (densify office facilities) = $75/ SF »Dispose: Facility exits and lease closures. Costs not assumed. »Swing: Temporary move into an existing facility. Costs not assumed. »Move-In: Planning associated with moving staff into a new location. Costs not assumed. »Develop for Non-County Use: Evaluation of feasibility and planning for non- County uses. Costs not assumed. »Quick Wins: Low cost and effort opportunities that can reduce operating costs. »Future annual escalation rates assumed for construction costs: • 2023 = 8% • 2024 - 2042 = 5% »2030 headcounts provided by Department Leadership in the Department Questionnaire, through Interviews, and other engagements assumed. “Occupancy costs” are defined to include both operating and capital expenses, costs related to replacement reserves, and offsets from intergovernmental funds (e.g., lease reimbursements) negotiated and authorized via countywide cost allocation plans in accordance with OMB A-87. Additional revenue offsets reflect estimates of property values that could potentially be realized from the disposition of certain existing assets under the Master Plan that would no longer be needed to accommodate existing functions. The approach used to analyze the portfolio permits decision makers to prepare for the Occupancy Costs timing and magnitude of incremental added costs that have been identified to accomplish the principles and goals of the Facilities Master Plan. Key data sources: »Asset Management Inventory (AMI) data from the CCC Public Works Department; »Facility Conditions Assessment (FCA) prepared by Gordian; »Consumer Price Index (CPI) data for the Bay Area; and »CoStar office market data for the county. Contra Costa County | Final Report Facility Conditions Assessment »A Facility Condition Assessment (“FCA”) was conducted separate from this Plan by the firm Gordian for most County- occupied facilities. This report only indicates FCA information for facilities included in the Plan. »FCA data is broken down by systems. The data provides asset values, system values, remaining system useful life and capital needs. »A Facility Condition Index (“FCI”) is simply the ratio of the cost of the Asset’s improvements identified as needed over the years divided by the Asset’s calculated replacement value (“CRV”), and expressed as a decimal fraction of one. »FCI is an indicator of facility condition and can be used to benchmark condition along consistent, industry standards. This approach is based on the International Facility Managers Association (IFMA) definitions. »The lower an asset’s FCI score, the better the building’s overall condition is assumed to be. 5 Year Facility Condition Index Scale Excellent Good Fair Poor Deficient Near-Term Requirement & Systems Renewal Costs Asset Current Replacement Value Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 43Gensler Project Scope & Assumptions - Assumptions Definitions »Agriculture = Agriculture / Weights & Measures »BIM = Building Information Modeling »BOS = Board of Supervisors »CAO = County Administrator’s Office »CAPEX = Capital Expenditure »CCTV = Contra Costa Television »CFS = Children & Family Services »Clerk = Clerk-Recorder-Elections Department »Cont. = Continued »DA = Office of the District Attorney »DCD = Department of Conservation and Development »DCSS = Department of Child Support Services »DoIT = Department of Information Technology »EHSD = Employment and Human Services Department »FCA = 2021-2022 Facility Condition Assessment performed by Gordian »FCI = Facility Condition Index = the value of the capital needs, divided into the value of the asset (a lower FCI value indicates ‘better’ condition; a higher value indicates ‘worse’ condition) »FF&E = Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment »FTE = Full Time Equivalent »GIS = Geographic Information System »GSF = Gross Square Footage »Haz Mat = Hazardous Materials »HR = Human Resources Department »HVAC = Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning »IHSS = In-Home Supportive Services »LAN = local area network »N/A = Not Available/Applicable The following definitions and abbreviations are referenced throughout the report. Detailed square footage definitions and diagrams are included to help understand the different categories. »NSF = Net Square Footage »Op = Option »OPEX = Operating Expenses »PD = Office of the Public Defender »Project Team = Contra Costa County and Gensler Project Team »PTE = Part Time Equivalent »PWD = Public Works Department »RSF = Rentable Square Footage »SF = Square Feet »USF = Usable Square Footage »WDB = Workforce Development Board General Contra Costa County | Final Report TERM EXAMPLE DIAGRAMS DEFINITIONS Gross Square Footage (GSF)Gross Building Area (exterior gross) is the total area of a building enclosed by exterior face of the perimeter walls, calculated on a floor-by-floor basis. Gross area is generally used for pricing by a construction company. Gross Measured Area (interior gross) is measured to the inside of the exterior walls and is used as the starting basis for rentable and usable square footage calculations. Gross area is composed of exterior wall thickness, and all vertical penetrations (i.e. mechanical, electrical, plumbing and elevator shafts and stairwells). Rentable Square Footage (RSF)Rentable Area is calculated by subtracting major vertical penetrations from the gross measured area and adding a prorated allocation of the building common spaces. Major vertical penetrations include stairwells, elevators, and major shaft spaces. Building common spaces include entry vestibule, ground floor egress corridors, common building service spaces (i.e. mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems, restrooms, janitorial closets and telecom/LAN closets), and loading docks. Usable Square Footage (USF)Usable Area is the entire occupiable tenant area of the floor, excluding permanent core features such as elevators, exit stairs, mechanical rooms, and toilets (includes circulation). Usable area is measured to the interior surface of the exterior wall. Net Square Footage (NSF)Net Area equals the actual square footage of programmed spaces (does not include ANY circulation). Net Square Footage is composed of workspaces, dedicated support (including dedicated conference spaces), and shared support (i.e. shared conference, entry lobby, shared floor support). Circulation Circulation Factor includes: Primary Circulation – main circulation route connecting the elevator lobby, exit stairs, and core toilets. Secondary Circulation – includes all circulation for remaining areas between rooms and workstations of the Net Square Footage not within. Square Footage 45Gensler Project Scope & Assumptions - Definitions Contra Costa County | Final Report 03 REAL ESTATE PORTFOLIO Overview 48 Real Estate Portfolio 50 Owned and Leased Facilities 52 Facility Conditions 56 Office Utilization 60 Parking 62 Storage 64 20-Year Occupancy Costs 66 Veterans Halls 68 Future Development Opportunities 70 Real Estate and Facilities Trends 72 47Gensler Square Feet Facilities Employees 1.81M 110 4,041 This chapter provides insight on the locations, square footage, conditions, and occupants of County facilities. The County portfolio included in the Plan is large, distributed, and diverse, with approximately 1.81 million square feet of owned and leased facilities across 110 individual facilities. Key Factors / SourcesKey Facts The following insights are based on: »Employee and department leadership perceptions from surveys, questionnaires, and interviews, »Assessments and perceptions from Gensler Team site tours, »Facility Condition Assessments (FCA) from the Gordian, Team, and »Operating expenses and occupancy costs from facility details provided by Finance and Public Works. Overview Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Key Findings Key Opportunities »72% of County-occupied square feet is in Central County. »24% of SF is leased. All leases will have expired by 2035. »Most facilities are rated as average by occupants. »Coordinating improvements especially in leased facilities is noted as challenging. »The FCA identified needs to remedy deferred maintenance and make improvements. »Several facilities were underutilized pre-COVID. »Parking in downtown Martinez is the most challenging due to limited spaces, theft, and homelessness. »Storage is decentralized. The large Juvenile Hall storage facility requires immediate vacancy. »Optimize use of current space. »Dispose of or adaptively reuse unneeded office space for other functions. »Re-evaluate all leases and consider relocating some services to County-owned facilities. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 49Gensler Real Estate Portfolio - Overview For the purposes of this study, the County’s geography was split into three regions: West, Central, and East. Supervisorial districts were not used due to redistricting efforts at the time the Plan was being developed. Central CountyWest County East County 72% of the County’s occupied SF and 73% of County staff work in facilities in this region. The City with the largest County presence is Martinez, the County seat. This region includes many of the County’s largest facilities and campuses including: 18% of the County’s occupied SF and 13% of County staff work in facilities in this region. The city with the largest County presence is Richmond. Key facilities include: »EHSD facility in business park at 151 Linus Pauling Drive, Hercules »EHSD facility in 1305 MacDonald Ave, Richmond »EHSD leased facility in 1275 Hall Ave, Richmond 10% of the County’s occupied SF and 14% of County staff work in facilities in this region. The City with the largest County presence is Antioch. Key facilities include: »Two facilities housing EHSD and Probation in 4545 and 4549 Delta Fair Blvd, Antioch »EHSD Call Center at 1650 Cavallo Road, Antioch Real Estate Portfolio »Newly constructed Administration Building at 1025 Escobar St, Martinez »Long-standing and iconic Finance Building, constructed in 1901, at 625 Court St, Martinez »Well-functioning multi-department facility adjacent to a large vacant County-owned parcel at 2530 Arnold Dr, Martinez (this location was considered for the Administration Building) »Four multi-department facilities in Douglas Drive, Martinez »Three EHSD leased facilities located at the Ellinwood business park in Pleasant Hill Contra Costa County | Final Report !!!!! !!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !!! !!!! !!! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! !!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !!! !!!! !!!! ! ! !! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! 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 East Region West Region Central Region Region Boundaries Source: ESRI, Contra Costa County Source: ESRI, Contra Costa County. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Exhibit 3.3. Map of County Facilities by Region Exhibit 3.1. Portfolio Square Footage and Staff by Region Exhibit 3.2. Department Presence by Region REGION DEPARTMENT COUNT 2020 HEADCOUNT West 8 518 Central 21 2,964 East 7 559 Total N/A 4,041 REGION FACILITY COUNT SQUARE FOOTAGE West 26 318K Central 63 1.3M East 21 188K Total 110 1.81M WEST CENTRAL EAST 51Gensler Real Estate Portfolio - 5-Year Implementation Overview 63% of occupied square feet is owned by the County, 24% is leased, and 13% is owned by other public agencies including City governments, State government, and School Districts. Many facilities were acquired on an as-needed basis to accommodate growth. With all leases expiring by 2035, this is the ideal time for the County to reevaluate their leasing strategy to build a more strategic portfolio. Owned Facilities Leased Facilities City/State/School Owned Facilities »1.14M SF (63% of portfolio) »2,782 staff »434K SF (24% of portfolio) »1,226 staff »35 leases »~$8M rent costs »All leases will have expired by 2035 »232K SF (13% of portfolio) »33 staff »Most of these facilities are libraries which are owned by cities and staffed by the County Owned and Leased Facilities Contra Costa County | Final Report ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !!!! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 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 City/State/School Owned County Owned County Leased Region Boundaries Source: ESRI, Contra Costa County Exhibit 3.4. Portfolio Square Footage and Staff by Ownership Exhibit 3.5. Map of County Facilities by Ownership REGION FACILITY COUNT SQUARE FOOTAGE 2020 HEADCOUNT Owned 51 1.14M 2,782 Leased 35 434K 1,226 City/State/School Owned 24 232K 33 Total 110 1.81M 4,041 WEST CENTRAL EAST Source: ESRI, Contra Costa County. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 53Gensler Real Estate Portfolio - Owned and Leased Facilities Exhibit 3.6. Lease square footage expiration by year Lease Expiration within Next 5 Years Source: Contra Costa County Public Works Asset Management Inventory; Gruen Gruen + Associates. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded.Square FootageYear Lease Expiration after 5 Years Contra Costa County | Final Report This page is intentionally left blank 55Gensler Real Estate Portfolio - Owned and Leased Facilities Facility Conditions Most facilities are rated as average by occupants and coordinating improvements is noted as challenging. A facility conditions assessment (“FCA”) was conducted in the fall of 2021 that identified needs to remedy deferred maintenance and make improvements. As maintaining the status quo is costly and difficult, the County needs to consider consolidation and disposition opportunities to optimize funding for improvements. Employee Experience Department Leadership Experience Data from the employee survey demonstrated: »Most aspects of facilities were rated 3 (Average) on a scale from 1 (Poor) to 5 (Excellent). »Key negatives include inadequate privacy, poor climate control, and overcrowding. Data from the department leader questionnaires and interviews demonstrated: »Most facilities that County departments occupy are supportive of work needs but require frequent repairs. »Key negatives include facilities running out of space, need for frequent facility repairs, and challenges scheduling facilities repairs and IT upgrades, especially for leased facilities (difficulty coordinating with owners, labor shortages in Public Works, etc.). »Positives include well- functioning customer service counters, meeting spaces, and skilled facility maintenance team from Public Works. »Key positives include cleanliness, comfortable seating, access to necessary technology, and safety. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Source: Gensler administered Contra Costa County Employee Survey, October 2021; Gensler administered Contra Costa County Department Leadership Questionnaire, October 2021 Leadership Questionnaire Responses Employee Survey Responses 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.) 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 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 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.) 3.2 3.2 3.8 4 4 Exhibit 3.7. Employee survey responses to “Please rate the design of the County office environment for”; 1: Poor to 5: Excellent Exhibit 3.8. Employee survey responses to “The County office environment...”; 1: Strongly Disagree to 5: Strongly Agree Exhibit 3.9. Leadership Questionnaire responses to “How well do the following spaces support your department’s needs?”; 1: Not Supportive to 5: Highly Supportive 57Gensler Real Estate Portfolio - Facility Conditions Site Tours Data from the Gensler Team’s site tours of 51 facilities, including drive-by visits, demonstrated: »Facilities interiors were all generally clean and well- maintained. »No standardized size or configuration for any space type (cubicles, offices, meeting rooms, etc.). »Storage areas/rooms in most facilities. »Observations aligned with Gordian’s FCA for owned facilities. A list of facilities toured is included in the appendix to this report.Shared breakrooms Workstations with partitions Heavy storage needs Public service counter Source: Gensler Site Tours, December 2021 and February 2022. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Facility Condition Assessment Data from the Gordian Team’s FCA demonstrated: »The average facility score is 0.334, meaning that facilities are in fair condition according to the facility condition index scale. »For example, the County’s new administration building at 1025 Escobar in Martinez has the lowest FCI score (0.000) and is in the best condition from a building systems perspective. »The facility at 3017 Walnut Blvd in Brentwood has the highest FCI score (1.045) and is in the worst condition from a building systems perspective. Source: Facility Conditions Assessment by Gordian, March 2022 5 Year Facility Condition Index Scale Excellent Good Fair Poor Deficient Near-Term Requirement & Systems Renewal Costs Asset Current Replacement Value 59Gensler Real Estate Portfolio - Facility Conditions Office Utilization Assuming that each employee in a County office facility has an assigned seat, the average space utilized for general office use is higher than many of the government agencies which Gensler had studied or benchmarked prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. The County should identify opportunities to make more efficient use of real estate. Employee Perception More investigation is needed to understand why facilities are perceived as overcrowded by employees. Potential reasons: »County facilities don’t follow standard sizes; some facilities may have many rows of large workstation with minimal circulation spaces, giving the impression of overcrowding. »Departments tend to grow headcount within existing facilities, despite other facilities having more space. This may cause some facilities to be densely occupied while others are sparsely occupied. »Significant space in some facilities may be consumed by non-office space such as storage and community spaces. Benchmark Methodology »The diagram on the right compares office utilization, measured in usable square feet per seat (USF/seat), of the County overall and 1025 Escobar St compared to local, state and federal agencies. »USF/seat is calculated by dividing the total usable area (assumed to be 75% of GSF) by the total number of seats. This number includes workspace, collaboration spaces and support spaces, and excludes specialty and core spaces, such as large building lobbies and training areas. Contra Costa County | Final Report 154 Federal Department US DEPT OF AGRICULTURE 205 Federal Department DEPT OF INTERIORS 195 Federal Department DEPT OF LABOR 213 County COUNTY OF ORANGE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 221 Federal Agency HHS - CMS 231 City CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE 265 Federal Agency US POSTAL SERVICE 257 Federal Department DEPT OF EDUCATION 194 Federal Agency DC - US PTO 193 County SONOMA COUNTY 159 County COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 150 200 300250 190 sf Suggested 203 County SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY Usable Square Feet per Seat 175 Federal Agency HHS - CDC 275 sf County Average 250 sf 1025 Escobar St Exhibit 3.10. Benchmarks of Usable Square Feet Per Seat Source: Gensler Benchmarks; Contra Costa County provided Building Layouts and Facilities Data. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 61Gensler Real Estate Portfolio - 5-Year Implementation OverviewReal Estate Portfolio - Office Utilization Parking Department leaders generally rated parking as moderately effective. Parking in downtown Martinez is the most challenging due to limited spaces, theft, and homelessness. Other facilities with unsafe parking are in East County. The County needs to invest in safer, better-lit parking, and a parking strategy for downtown Martinez. Department Leadership Experience Parking Lot Pavement Management The department leadership questionnaire identified: »On average, employee and visitor parking was rated 3 out of 5 (1 = highly effective, 5 = not effective). »Employees and visitors share parking lots. Visitors park at street meters when lots are full. »There are limited parking spaces in front of facilities Nichols Consulting Engineers updated the pavement management program (“PMP”) in 2021. Current conditions of parking lots were evaluated, and future funding needs and costs were identified. Not all parking lots in the report are connected to the facilities in the Plan. for short-term or customer use. Enforcement and dedicated visitor parking may be needed. »Some departments also have fleet vehicles that require secure parking. »Department leaders have requested additional electrical vehicle charging and solar. »The County maintains 83 parking lots (~350,432.7 square yard). »28 parking lots are funding by the General Fund. »27% of the parking lots are in “Good” condition, 43% in “Fair” condition. The remaining 31% percent are in “Poor” or “Failed” condition. »The County needs to spend approximately $11.4 million over the next ten years to bring all the parking lots to a condition which can be maintained with on-going preventive maintenance in the most cost-effective way. Contra Costa County | Final Report CONDITION CATEGORY PCI RANGE GENERAL FUNDED PARKING LOTS (%) NON-GENERAL FUNDED PARKING LOTS (%) ENTIRE NETWORK (%) Good 70-100 3.4 23.3 26.7 Fair 50-69 16.7 25.9 42.6 Poor 25-49 2.8 11.7 14.5 Failed <25 8.9 7.3 16.2 Total 31.8 68.2 100 Exhibit 3.12. Parking lot conditions from parking lot pavement management implementation report Source: Gensler administered Contra Costa County Department Leadership Questionnaire and Interviews, October – December 2021; Nichols Consulting Engineers prepared Contra Costa County Parking Lot Pavement Management Implementation Report, December 2021. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. FACILITIES WITH THE HIGHEST SCORES CITY PARKING SCORE 777 Arnold Dr Martinez 5 100 37th St Richmond 5 3020 Second St Knightsen 5 2101 Vale Rd San Pablo 5 4005 Port Chicago Concord 5 2380 Bisso Ln Concord 5 2530 Arnold Dr Martinez 5 3361 Walnut Blvd Brentwood 5 Overall Employee Parking Score 3.2/5 Overall Visitor Parking Score 3.2/5 Exhibit 3.11. Parking scores from department leadership questionnaire and interviews FACILITIES WITH THE LOWEST SCORES CITY PARKING SCORE 627 Ferry St Martinez 1 4800 Imhoff Pl Martinez 1 610 Marina Vista Ave Martinez 1 620 Marina Vista Ave Martinez 1 220 Pacific Ave Rodeo 1 FACILITIES WITH THE HIGHEST SCORES CITY PARKING SCORE 777 Arnold Dr Martinez 5 100 37th St Richmond 5 3020 Second St Knightsen 5 1330 Arnold Dr Martinez 5 4005 Port Chicago Hwy Concord 5 2101 Vale Rd San Pablo 5 2530 Arnold Dr Martinez 5 3361 Walnut Blvd Brentwood 5 FACILITIES WITH THE LOWEST SCORES CITY PARKING SCORE 2250 Galaxy Ct Concord 1 627 Ferry St Martinez 1 4800 Imhoff Pl Martinez 1 63Gensler Real Estate Portfolio - Parking Storage Storage is decentralized across many locations in the County (both internal to the County and external through third party vendors). Additionally, with the storage facility at the old Juvenile Hall requiring immediate vacancy, a strategy for current and future storage is needed. Internal Storage1 External Storage1 »Many departments use a combination of onsite storage at their office location and offsite storage at another County facility or external storage vendor. »Assessor, Conservation & Development, Public Defender, and Library store files and equipment in the Old Juvenile Hall, which will need to be transferred to a new location post-closure. »Multiple departments also have individual contracts with various external storage vendors, costing $370K+ annually. »Veterans Services and Public Works have transitioned or are in the process of transitioning to paperless, virtual storage. »Several departments have secure and unique storage needs, including Auditor-Controller, Human Resources, Risk Management, Information Technology, Agriculture, Child Support Services, and Notes: 1 Not all departments shared storage information - the storage data in this Master Plan only represents a portion of occupied storage. Library. »Although outside the current scope, Health Services and Sheriff departments can be included in sizing a new onsite County storage facility. They also have extensive storage needs and occupy multiple facilities. Contra Costa County | Final Report INTERNAL STORAGE The following departments are storing documents, books, and boxes offsite in Contra Costa County and Solano County: Metropolitan Van & Storage »County Administrator’s Office (Clerk of the Board) »Risk Management Public Storage »EHSD Security Public Storage »EHSD Vital Records Control »County Counsel »District Attorney Access Information Management »Health Services EXTERNAL STORAGE 5 Vendors $370K+ Annual Costs PAPERLESS OTHER COUNTY LOCATION ONSITE PAPERLESS »Veterans Service »Public Works (in progress) ONSITE Secured Storage Needs »Auditor-Controller »Human Resources »Risk Management »Information Technology Unique Storage Needs »Agriculture »Child Support Services »Library OTHER LOCATION Old Juvenile Hall »Assessor »Conservation and Development »Public Defender »Library SPECTRUM OF INTERNAL STORAGE 5+ Cities Across 2 Counties Exhibit 3.13. Key Storage1 Facts Source: Gensler administered Contra Costa County Department Leadership Questionnaire and Interviews, October – December 2021. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 65Gensler Real Estate Portfolio - Storage Operating Expenses Expenses grew by 29% for leased office properties and 9% for owned office space over the three-year period between Fiscal Year 2018 and 2021, suggesting work-from- home policies did not result in operating expense savings. Office Properties Non-Office Properties »Operating expenses for owned office properties increased by approximately 9% between 2018 and 2021, from $9.63-per- square-foot in 2018 to $10.50-per-square-foot by 2021. »Expenses for leased office properties grew more significantly from $8.86 per square foot in 2018 to $11.49 per square foot by 2021. »Custodial, grounds, and security costs for leased office properties increased dramatically, growing a total of 246% ($0.72 per square foot in FY 2018 to $2.48 per square foot in FY 2021). »Insurance expenses for owned properties increased by approximately 32% over the three-year period, totaling almost $1.00 per square foot in FY 2021. »As would be expected, the “non-office” properties in the portfolio generally had lower operating expenses. »Operating expenses for owned non-office properties were relatively stable in 2018 and 2021 at $8.60 per square foot and $8.86 per square foot, respectively. »Overall expenses for leased properties declined slightly from $4.45 per square foot in 2018 to $4.14 per square foot by 2021. »Total expenses for owned properties overall remained essentially stable. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 3.14. Per-Square-Foot Operating Expenses for Office Properties Exhibit 3.15. Per-Square-Foot Operating Expenses for Non-Office Properties Source: Sources: Contra Costa County, Public Works, Asset Management Inventory; Gruen Gruen + Associates. 67Gensler Real Estate Portfolio - Operating Expenses Veterans Halls Veteran’s use of the Veterans Halls has diminished in the County and no longer generates enough revenue for maintenance and repairs. A comprehensive needs study should be prepared that recommends how best to serve multi-generational veterans in cost-effective contemporary settings, while preserving the historic mission of veterans memorial halls. Background »In 1919, shortly after WWI, Congress established the national charter for the American Legion to honor veterans of the ‘Great War’. »The federal government also made funds available to local counties to build memorial buildings in towns where there were American Legion Posts. Current Status »Several of the memorial halls have been refurbished or replaced. Danville and Lafayette had major renovations and are now owned by non-profit trusts. Contra Costa County is part of the Lafayette group and obligated to pay for major repairs. »The County still owns all or part of eight halls. They are managed by the local »Contra Costa County likely raised additional funds, which led to land acquisition and construction of approximately nine veterans halls over the years. American Legion/Veterans of Foreign Wars groups who pay $1.00 per year on month-to-month lease agreements. »The original revenue generating concept was that these buildings would be rented for events and on- going programs sponsored by non-profits and for- profit organizations. These revenues would be used to Contra Costa County | Final Report maintain the buildings and fund veterans activities. »However, these remaining County owned halls are now generally old and costly to maintain. They no longer generate significant event or program revenue because of competition from more modern venues. In addition, younger veterans don’t seem to be drawn to activities at these buildings. »As a result, the County has had to step in, at high cost, to keep these buildings open, even though maintenance and repairs are theoretically the responsibility of the tenant veterans’ groups. »The table below summarizes the economic picture based on recent facilities condition assessment reports prepared by Gordian. Financial ObligationsCurrent Status (continued) ADDRESS CITY YEAR BUILT*YEAR RENOVATED SQ. FT FCI SCORE FCI COST 406 6th St.Antioch 1928/ 1919 2000 9,000 0.331 $1,258,416 757 1st St.Brentwood 1925/ 1920 6,780 0.179 $567,562 2290 Willow Pass Road Concord 1929/ 1920 13,757 0.309 $1,724,254 6401 Stockton Ave El Cerrito 1932/ 1920 13,445 0.317 $679,747 3780 Mt. Diablo Blvd.Lafayette 2004/ 2005 9,529 0.137 $996,365 930 Ward St.Martinez 1927/ 1925 6,890 0.165 $567,562 186 E. Leland Rd.Pittsburg 1988/ 1920 3,600 0.392 $646,269 968 23rd St.Richmond 1957/ 1955 2020 14,920 0.130 $1,433,527 Total 77,921 $7,873,702 »Going forward, it appears that the financial obligations will continue to be a strain on the County, while veterans’ use of the facilities Exhibit 3.16. Veterans Memorial Halls Financial Needs * First number from FCI report, second number from Contra Costa County Public Works Asset Management Inventory Source: 2021-2022 Facility Condition Assessment performed by Gordian; Contra Costa County Public Works Asset Management Inventory will continue to diminish (except the new Lafayette facility). 69Gensler Real Estate Portfolio - Veterans Halls Future Development Opportunities Arnold Drive, Martinez; Technology Way, Brentwood; and Delta Fair, Antioch were identified as potential vacant parcels for future development. The County should conduct due diligence to assess the site feasibility of these three parcels as well as determine the future of remaining properties in the portfolio. Background »The maps on the right shows County-owned properties considered for future development. They were evaluated based on site size, location, zoning, relationship with existing County facilities, etc. »Central County has one undeveloped site adjacent to 2530 Arnold Drive, Martinez. It is a known County location with an existing office building for multiple departments. »There are two potential East County sites in Brentwood and Antioch. Some departments have expressed a desire to locate farther east to be closer to customers. »For Delta Fair in Antioch, the County can develop the parking lot behind the current 4545 Delta Fair offices or expand across the street. Use of the land across the street will have to be confirmed with Contra Costa Fire Protection District and the State. Contra Costa County | Final Report Central County East County East County Source: Contra Costa County GIS; CCMAP; Contra Costa County Assessor Parcel Maps. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Arnold Drive, Martinez 13.36 acres Technology Way, Brentwood 2.82 acres Delta Fair, Antioch 14.16 acres combined »Undeveloped land and surface parking lot »Adjacent to 2530 Arnold, a County facility with Assessor and Risk Management »Close to public transportation (Tri Delta Transit; County Connection) and freeways »Previously considered for the County Administration building »4545/4549 Delta Fair: 1.9 acre surface parking lot behind existing County facilities with EHSD and Probation »Across the street: 12.26 acres of undeveloped land (to be confirmed; owned by Riverview FPD annexed to Contra Costa FPD and the State) »Close to public transportation (Tri Delta Transit) and freeways »Undeveloped land over 6 contiguous lots »In a neighborhood with office, retail, school, warehouse and housing nearby »Close to public transportation (Tri Delta Transit) »Previously considered as a potential East County Government Center in 2011 Potential Development Area Technology WayBus Center DrSchool Industrial Park Hotel Office Buildings Commercial Store Vacant Land Restaurant Mini-Warehouse Potential Development Area Surface Parking Ground- Mounted Solar 2530 Arnold Surface Parking SR-4 4549 Delta Fair Potential Development Area 4545 Delta Fair Potential Vacant Parcels To be confirmed - owned by Riverview FPD/ annexed to Contra Costa FPD and the State Potential Development Area State Hi g h w a y 4 Arnold Dr P a c h e c o B l v d Bus Stop County-owned Bus Stop Non-County-owned County-owned Bus Stop County-owned Delta Fai r B l v d Residential Industrial Residential Residential Industrial 71Gensler Real Estate Portfolio - Future Development Opportunities Real Estate and Facilities Trends Asset Management Systems The Project Team conducted benchmarking research across public and private organizations, including neighboring counties in the San Francisco Bay Area, to understand recent trends in real estate and facilities management. The trends listed below were considered by the County during the initial visioning process. »Investing in asset management & GIS systems. »Building enterprise-wide real estate database systems for county assets. Ongoing in Marin County and San Mateo County. »Developing real-time facility management with predictive analytic capabilities for proactive Investment Priorities »Prioritizing investments in public-facing real estate, facilities, and infrastructure »Postponing major, non- critical County projects. Marin County postponed any new major space planning projects that were not in progress prior to the pandemic. »Creating additional service hubs to better serve the County population. San Mateo County and Santa Clara County have added new service centers. planning. Ongoing in Marin County and San Mateo County. »Providing professional organizational structure to implement and manage a complex real estate portfolio. Ongoing in Orange County. Contra Costa County | Final Report Digital Literacy »Raising the digital literacy of the workforce and better supporting hybrid and remote work. »Developing post-COVID work policies. Marin County 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. Infrastructure Resiliency »Upgrading infrastructure to increase resilience to climate, fire and earthquake risks. »Developing emergency preparation and communications systems. Marin County launched a web-based evacuation mapping tool for county residents and businesses. »Evaluating development opportunities with climate resiliency lens. Ongoing in several counties. Office Modernization »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 hybrid work models into renovations of existing and new 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. Source: Gensler Project Benchmarking, Sept - Oct 2021; Marin County Official Website; San Mateo County Official Website; Santa Clara County Official Website 73Gensler Real Estate Portfolio - Real Estate and Facilities Trends Contra Costa County | Final Report 04 CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE 75Gensler Overview 76 County Population Growth 78 Service Proximity 80 Private Transportation 84 Public Transportation 86 Physical/Field Service Delivery Experience 88 Virtual Service Delivery Experience 90 Service Delivery Trends 92 Overview This chapter evaluates key customer experience factors to help determine the ideal locations for County facilities. Census data, transit data, and information from County departments helped inform insights into the County’s customers and their needs. The following pages explore factors that informed the evaluation of customer experience such as: »Population growth »Population density »Income and poverty levels »EHSD active case locations »Transit options 2020 County Population Projected 2030 Population Median Age Employment Rate 1,165,927 1,244,173 39.9 61.4% At a Glance Key Factors Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report »Plan for service delivery opportunities in areas of growth. »Explore opportunities for regional hubs, one-stop service centers, and remote services. »Consider opportunities to improve public transit, occupy future facilities proximate to transit lines, and offer visitor stalls in all public facilities. »Contra Costa County is growing rapidly and will continue to expand in population over the next decade. »Facilities are not always proximate to the populations needing County services, especially in East County. »Public transit to reach County facilities is poor, car commutes are long, and not all facilities have dedicated visitor parking. »Most departments occupy individual facilities, requiring customers to travel to multiple locations to access services. Key Findings Key Recommendations Source: US Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; 2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 77Gensler Customer Experience - Overview County Population Growth Contra Costa County is growing rapidly and will continue to expand in population over the next decade. Service delivery can be expanded in growth areas particularly around Brentwood, Oakley, and Pittsburg in East County. Growth & Mobility »Contra Costa County’s population growth is exceeding census estimates. In 2020, the county’s total population was 1,165,927, which was an 11% increase from 2010 (116,902 people). This was 1.4% higher than the census estimate of 1,149,853. »By the year 2030, the total population is projected to grow by another 7% »Over half of the county’s 398,299 households are married-couple family households (54.9%). The average family size is 3.34, and 22.7% of the county population are under 18 years old. »The median age of 39.9 in the county is slightly higher than CA median (36.7). 15.8% of the county population is 65 years and older, higher than the CA median (14.3%). »8.2% of the county population and 9.9% of residents under 18 years old are considered at poverty level. »11.6% of the county population have disabilities, the highest of which are ambulatory difficulty and independent living difficulty. (1,244,173 people). »In the last year, 3.9% of residents relocated from a different county within California; 1% of residents relocated from a different state. »The county’s population growth is increasing most rapidly in East County, with 4 of the 5 fastest growing cities located in that area. Demographics Contra Costa County | Final Report General Government: Assessor; Auditor- Controller; County Counsel; Clerk- Recorder; Human Resources; Information Technology; Public Works; Tax Collector- Treasurer; County Administrator’s Office; Risk Management. Public Protection: Agriculture, Child Support Services, Conservation and Development, District Attorney, Probation, Public Defender. Public Assistance: Employment and Human Services; Veteran Services. Public Ways and Facilities: Public Works, Animal Services Education: Library Source: US Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; Projections Prepared by Demographic Research Unit, California Department of Finance, July 2021; Total Population and Population Change: 2010 and 2020 Prepared by Demographic Research Unit, California Department of Finance, August 2021; 2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. !!!!! !!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !!! !!!! !!! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!!! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !!!! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! !! !!! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !!!! ! !! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! Orinda Lafayette Clayton Moraga Concord Danville Martinez Pleasant Hill San Ramon Walnut Creek 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 0 to 5% Region Boundaries 6% to 10% 11% to 15% 16% to 20% 21% and up Population change % from 2010-2020 - Cities Public Ways & Facilities Education General Government Public Assistance Public Protection Other Exhibit 4.1. Population change between 2010-20. Exhibit 4.2. Residential mobility in the last year. CITY OR TOWN REGION POPULATION CHANGE, 2010-20 Brentwood East 25% Oakley East 22% Pittsburg East 21% San Ramon Central 17% Antioch East 13% Exhibit 4.3. Cities/towns with the highest population change between 2010-20. 6.2%Moved within the Same County Moved from a Different County, Same State 3.9% Moved from a Different State 1.0% Moved from Abroad 0.8% WEST CENTRAL EAST 79Gensler Customer Experience - County Population Growth Service Proximity Not all County functions are proximate to customer needs. Service delivery locations can better support areas that have the densest population, lowest income levels, and the most active Employment & Human Services (“EHSD”) case counts, particularly within East County. Population Density »Among the top five dense cities and towns, two are in West County and two are in East County. However, most County facilities, notably General Government, are located in Central County. #1 San Pablo, West #2 El Cerrito, West #3 Pleasant Hill, Central #4 Brentwood, East #5 Pittsburg, East »53% of EHSD staff are concentrated in Central County even though that region accounts for only 26% of active EHSD cases. »East County accounts for 40% of active EHSD cases with highest case count in the cities of Antioch (17% of cases) and Pittsburg/Bay Point (15% of cases). General Government: Assessor; Auditor- Controller; County Counsel; Clerk- Recorder; Human Resources; Information Technology; Public Works; Tax Collector- Treasurer; County Administrator’s Office; Risk Management. Public Protection: Agriculture, Child Support Services, Conservation and Development, District Attorney, Probation, Public Defender. Public Assistance: Employment and Human Services; Veteran Services. Public Ways and Facilities: Public Works, Animal Services. Education: Library »County functions are generally proximate to low-income households in Central and West County, but there is limited proximity in East County. Poverty LevelEHSD Cases Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report !!!!! !!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !!! !!!! !!! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!!! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !!!! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! !! !!! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !!!! ! !! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! 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 CountySonoma County Marin County San Francisco County San Mateo County 0 to 2699 2700 to 5899 5900 to 9559 9560 to 17599 17,600 and up Population Density per Sq Mile Public Ways & Facilities Education General Government Region Boundaries Public Assistance Public Protection Other Source: ESRI, ESRI Business Analyst, American Community Survey, Contra Costa County, California GIS Portal, Association of Bay Area Governments Exhibit 4.4. Proximity based on population density. Source: Total Population and Population Change: 2010 and 2020 Prepared by Demographic Research Unit, California Department of Finance, August 2021; ESRI; ESRI Business Analyst; 2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; Contra Costa County; California GIS Portal. WEST CENTRAL EAST 81Gensler Customer Experience - Service Proximity 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 CountySonoma 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 0 to 500 Region Boundaries 501 to 2,000 2,001 to 5,000 5,001 to 10,000 # of Clients 10,001 to 20,000 20,001 & up IHSS MediCAL CALFresh CALWorks GA OtherEHS Facilities EHSD Clients by Zipcode Exhibit 4.5. Proximity based on EHSD case count. REGION ACTIVE EHSD CASE COUNTS EHSD 2020 STAFF HEADCOUNT West 124,338 (30%)426 (21%) Central 107,400 (26%)1,046 (53%) East 165,351 (40%)512 (26%) CC or Unknown 17,173 (4%)N/A Total 414,262 1,984 Source: Total Population and Population Change: 2010 and 2020 Prepared by Demographic Research Unit, California Department of Finance, August 2021; ESRI; ESRI Business Analyst; 2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; Contra Costa County; California GIS Portal; EHSD Active Cases & Individuals, May 2022. WEST CENTRAL EAST Contra Costa County | Final Report 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 CountySonoma 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 0 to 5% Region Boundaries 5% to 10% 11% to 20% 21% to 30% 31% and up Household % Below the Poverty Line Public Ways & Facilities Education General Government Public Assistance Public Protection Other !!!!! !!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !!! !!!! !!! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!!! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !!!! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! !! !!! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !!!! ! !! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! Exhibit 4.6. Proximity based on poverty level. Source: Total Population and Population Change: 2010 and 2020 Prepared by Demographic Research Unit, California Department of Finance, August 2021; ESRI; ESRI Business Analyst; 2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; Contra Costa County; California GIS Portal. WEST CENTRAL EAST 83Gensler Customer Experience - Service Proximity Private Transportation County residents typically travel by car, but commute times are long, and parking isn’t always available in County facilities. Improving the visitor parking experience and developing more virtual services will be beneficial to customers. »According to the United States Census Bureau, over 76% of County workers 16 years and older travel by car to their place of work. »9.9% of County workers worked at home. »County workers spend more time commuting to their places of work than workers across the state and nation. Contra Costa County Average: 38.5 mins California Average: 29.8 mins (23% lower than CCC) National Average: 27.6 mins (30% lower than CCC) Transportation Mode »Contra Costa County was the third most congested county in the San Francisco Bay Area during 2021 Q3. »The top bottleneck location in the San Francisco Bay Area was I80 Eastbound at Pinole Valley Rd during the evening rush. »Parking at County facilities was rated 3.3 out of 5 (moderately supportive) by department leaders. »Several facilities don’t have dedicated visitor parking. ParkingTraffic & Congestion Contra Costa County | Final Report Source: United States Census Bureau; 2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; Caltrans District 04 Mobility Performance Report; Gensler administered Contra Costa County Department Leadership Questionnaire October - November 202. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Parking for County customers is a challenge. Several facilities don’t have dedicated visitor parking: »1025 Escobar St, Martinez (Clerk of the Board, Human Resources, County Administration, County Counsel) »2020 North Broadway, Walnut Creek (County Counsel, Public Defender, Employment & Human Services) »4785 Blum Rd, Martinez (County Counsel) »627 Ferry St, Martinez (Office of the Public Defender) 3.3/5 Moderately Supportive Exhibit 4.7. Means of transportation to work (workers 16 years and over) in Contra Costa County Exhibit 4.8. Parking at County facilities. TRANSPORTATION MODE CURRENT Car (Drive Alone, Carpool, Car Service)76.4% Public Transit (Subway/Metro, Bus, Train)10.3% Walk 1.6% Other Means 1.8% Work at Home 9.9% 1.6% 9.9% 76.4% 10.3% 1.8% Car Public Transit Walk Other Work at Home 85Gensler Customer Experience - Private Transportation Public Transportation Reaching County facilities by public transport can be time-consuming and complex. Future service delivery locations can be situated closer to transit hubs to provide more efficient use of public transportation for customers. Access »96% of the County’s 81 customer-facing facilities are located within 1/2 mi of a public transportation stop. »Customers may have to use multiple modes of public transit, resulting in long commutes to reach County facilities. »Cross-regional travel is especially difficult due to the multitude of bus agencies in Contra Costa County (each covering a specific region) and BART’s distance from downtown Martinez. »Each transit agency has their own process to change travel routes. The County will have to demonstrate critical mass of ridership for any modifications. »The County has funded pilot transportation programs in the past, such as the Dougherty Valley development. »Some customers, such as seniors, differently abled adults, and low income households have mobility issues and are unable to travel to facilities. »Not all public facilities offer bike and pedestrian access. Route Changes Limitations Contra Costa County | Final Report Source: ESRI, Contra Costa County, CalTrans, California GIS Portal, Association of Bay Area Governments, Bay Area Rapid Transit. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! !!! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! !!! !! !! ! !! !!!! !! ! ! 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 Amtrak & Regional Rail Bus Routes - AC Transit, County Connection, Tri Delta, & WestCAT BART Rail BART Station Amtrak Station Major Highways & Roads Customer Facing Facilities Source: ESRI, Contra Costa County, CalTrans, California GIS Portal, Association of Bay Area Governments, Bay Area Rapid Transit Exhibit 4.9. Public transportation routes to customer facing facilities. WEST CENTRAL EAST 87Gensler Customer Experience - Public Transportation Physical/Field Service Delivery Experience Physical service (in-person at a physical County address) and field service (in-person at a non-County or customer address) are the dominant service delivery models at the County. Departments and customers want to improve service access through collocation, satellite locations, and increased self-service or mobile options. Findings »74% of County facilities are customer-facing, with the majority in Central County. »Customers often visit multiple facilities for related services offered by different departments, such as social services or property payments. »Department leaders desire co-location with other departments who serve the same customer. »During the pandemic, some departments shifted in-person visits to appointment only. »Although virtual services are available, some customers still prefer or require in- person assistance. »Field services continued during the pandemic due to the nature of the work. !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! !!! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! !!! !! !! ! !! !!!! !! ! ! Orinda Lafayette Clayton Moraga Concord Danville Martinez Pleasant Hill San Ramon Walnut Creek Alamo Blackhawk Camino Tassajara Diablo Pacheco Brentwood Oakley Antioch Pittsburg Bay Point Bethel Island Byron Clyde DiscoveryBay Knightsen Pinole Richmond San Pablo ElCerrito Hercules Crockett El Sobrante Kensington PortCostaRodeo Alameda County San Joaquin County Sacramento CountySolano County Napa County Sonoma County Marin County San Francisco County San Mateo County Region Boundaries Customer Facing Facilities Source: ESRI, Contra Costa County Exhibit 4.10. Customer facing facilities WEST CENTRAL EAST Contra Costa County | Final Report Satellite Locations/Shared Counters in Libraries and Veterans Halls Offered by Public Protection and Public Assistance departments Public Access to Computers and Self-Service Kiosks Offered by Human Resources, Child Support Services, Library, and EHSD Current Physical/Field Service Offerings »Child Support Services meet with customers at their Martinez satellite location by the courthouse. »District Attorney, Probation, Public Defender, EHSD, and Veterans Service have offices in all three regions. »Human Resources offers self-service computer kiosks in their office lobby. »Child Support Services kept the payment window open during the pandemic and will open a self-service kiosk. Field/Mobile Services (e.g. Vans) Offered by Clerk-Recorder- Elections, Agriculture, Public Works and EHSD »Mobile services allow departments to reach underserved populations or areas with limited transportation options. »Agriculture and Public Works travel for field services as needed. Source: Gensler administered Contra Costa County Department Leadership Questionnaire and Interviews, October - November 2021. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 89Gensler Customer Experience - Physical/Field Service Delivery Experience Virtual Service Delivery Experience The stay-at-home orders in 2020 forced the County to shift service delivery to virtual overnight. Both customers and employees have adjusted to alternative platforms (e.g. online website, telephone, fax, mail, email or video conference), and some have requested permanent changes after positive experiences. This highlights the importance of both in-person and virtual delivery to the County’s future operations. Findings »Prior to the pandemic, most County departments had an online website and were reachable through the phone, mail or email. Many still relied on paper documents. »The biggest shifts have been video conferencing and paperless documentation. »Video conferencing has expanded service access by removing geographic limitations and increased customer participation. It was previously restricted to preapproved circumstances. »One of the newest offerings is Veterans Service’s virtual office where a representative assists customers through video conference using the Zoom platform. »Online document storage and e-signatures have also lessened the need to print paper files and store onsite. Employees find it easier to organize and share digital files. Many departments are moving towards 100% paperless documentation. »Some departments, such as Conservation and Development, converted submission forms and customer service to virtual first. »The County recognizes that internet access is a critical need and has been increasing access outside facilities. Contra Costa County | Final Report Online Paperless Documentation and E-Signatures Offered by most County departments Online Services Offered by Veterans Service, Animal Services, Child Support Services, Conservation & Development Public Access to Wifi Inside and Outside Facilities Offered inside most facilities, including all libraries Current Virtual Service Offerings »Many departments have reduced storage needs with online paperless documentation. »Remaining files are kept for regulatory and confidentiality purposes. »Veterans Service’s virtual office has the same hours as the physical address. »Video conferencing has increased court hearing participation rate at Child Support Services. »EHSD offers low-cost internet service and computers for eligible County residents. »The Library provides Wifi hotspot kits for free to cardholders as well as free internet in outside areas. Source: Gensler administered Contra Costa County Department Leadership Questionnaire and Interviews, October - November 2021. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 91Gensler Customer Experience - Virtual Service Delivery Experience Service Delivery Trends Service Access The Project Team conducted benchmarking research across public and private organizations, including neighboring counties in the San Francisco Bay Area, to understand recent trends in service delivery. The trends listed below were considered by the County during the initial visioning process. »Bringing government closer to the people. San Mateo County is building a new healthcare hub in South San Francisco for North County residents. »Distributing service delivery for public health and social services. Los Angeles County has expanded its footprint across a large geography to bring services closer to One-Stop Service Centers »Introducing virtual and in-person one-stop service centers. Alameda County consolidated 6 departments to the Eden Area Multi- Service Center for social, career and housing assistance. »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. those in need. »Introducing shared service counters with rotating departments. Santa Cruz County is introducing a shared service counter in Watsonville. Contra Costa County | Final Report »Expanding public-private partnerships. Counties are increasing partnerships with private businesses to offer community services. »Supporting local businesses. Birmingham, AL’s #BhamStrong partnership includes government, university, and private-sector organizations that support businesses with loans and business advisory assistance. »Accelerating digital service delivery. The pandemic shifted operations to online platforms for most counties. »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. Many counties have expanded internet infrastructure to improve digital access. »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. Digital Service Delivery Public Connectivity Public-Private Partnerships »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. Source: Gensler Project Benchmarking, Sept - Oct 2021; Alameda County Official Website; San Mateo County Official Website 93Gensler Customer Experience - Service Delivery Trends Contra Costa County | Final Report 05 EMPLOYEE & DEPARTMENT EXPERIENCE 95Gensler Overview 96 County Employees 94 Employee Transportation 96 Department Headcount Growth 98 Department Adjacencies 100 Work Culture 102 Work Collaboration 104 Remote Work: Employee Experience 106 Remote Work: Departmental Expectations 108 Overview This chapter evaluates the current employee experience and identifies future needs for County departments. Employee surveys, department leader questionnaires, and department leader interviews were employed to inform current workplace experience. The following pages explore topics that informed the evaluation of the employee experience such as: »Department locations and growth »Department adjacencies »Hybrid and remote working »Return to work strategies »Office environment »Workplace conditions »Transportation Key Factors Employee Survey Department Leader Questionnaires Department Leader Interviews 47% (1,993 Responses) 20 21 Response Rates Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report »While County employees are collaborative and service- oriented, adjacencies between complementary departments can be improved to enhance work efficiencies. »Employees want more remote work opportunities than the current policy allows, while many department leaders would prefer employees to be onsite more frequently. »Most employees commute via car but would consider alternatives in the future. »As a result of the pandemic, departments are leveraging virtual technology for employee and customer engagement. »Employee headcount is expected to grow by 19% by 2030. »Explore opportunities to consolidate into one-stop centers to improve department coordination and service delivery. »Consider updating and expanding the policy for job functions that can work remotely. »Explore opportunities to reduce carbon emissions generated by cars to help meet the County’s climate goals. »Continue investing in technologies that best support both the evolving needs of employees and customers. »Explore opportunities to efficiently accommodate growing headcount in County facilities. Key Findings Key Recommendations Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 97Gensler Employee & Department Experience - Overview County Employees There are over 4,000* employees that work for Contra Costa County, of which 1,993 participated in the survey that informed this chapter. The majority of the respondents work in the Employment & Human Services department (“EHSD”). Additionally, 40% of the respondents have worked for the County for more than 10 years. Departments »EHSD is the largest department in the County as well as the majority of survey respondents. »Veterans Services is the smallest department and survey respondent group. »27% of respondents have been working at the County for 4 years or less. »71% have been at the County for 5 years or more. »The largest cohort have worked for the County for more than 10 years. »Prior to the pandemic, respondents worked onsite at their assigned County location more than 80% of the time. »96% of employees have an assigned workspace. Tenure Work Locations Notes: * Included in this study »Over 65% of employees agree that their jobs rely heavily on working alone and learning new skills. »Only 36% of employees agree that their jobs rely heavily on specific spaces located in the workplace. Work Activities Contra Costa County | Final Report Source: Gensler administered Contra Costa County Employee Survey, October - November 2021. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Exhibit 5.2. Employee survey responses to “How long have you been with the County?”Exhibit 5.1. Employee survey responses to “Which is your function or department?” Exhibit 5.3. Employee survey responses to “Currently, how much of your time do you spend working in each of these locations (e.g. 1 day/week = 20%)?” Working from a client/ customer/vendor site Working at home On site at your assigned County location 12% 3% 82% 1%1%2% A different County site On the road/ Traveling for business Other locations Exhibit 5.4. Employee survey responses to “My job heavily relies on...” 45 ACTIVITY DISAGREE NEITHER AGREE Working alone 18%17%65% In-person collaboration 23%19%58% Virtual collaboration 21%23%56% Unplanned/informal interactions with colleagues 24%27%50% Being accessible and visible to people outside my team 28%21%51% Learning new skills 10%24%66% Specific spaces located in the workplace 39%25%36% Specific technologies located in the workplace 36%23%41% Specific materials and resources located in the workplace 34%23%42% In-person interaction with clients/public 40%18%42% Virtual interaction with clients/public 32%22%46% 95Gensler Employee & Department Experience - 5-Year Implementation OverviewEmployee & Department Experience - County Employees Employee Transportation The majority of County employee survey respondents take a car to work, but would consider other transportation options. There is increased interest in alternatives to driving, such as public transit or a County-sponsored shuttle. Commute Behaviors & Preferences »When commuting to their place of work, 94% of survey respondents drive alone, carpool/rideshare with others, or take a car service, regardless of travel distance. »However, when asked about preferred mode of commuting in the future, only 73% of respondents would want to take a car to work. »57% of respondents’ commute takes 30 minutes or less. This is 31% less than the average commute time of 39.3 minutes for general County population. »The majority of department facilities are located in Central County, whereas only 34% of County employees reside in Central County. »25% employees live outside the County. »If the remote work policy becomes permanent, the commute complaints expressed by employees may not be as much of an issue. Employee vs Facility Locations Contra Costa County | Final Report Source: ESRI, ESRI Business Analyst, American Community Survey, Contra Costa County, California GIS Portal, Association of Bay Area Governments *Map only includes zipcode tabulation areas that are fully or partially within Contra Costa County Boundary 0 - 26 Region Boundaries 26-50 51-100 101-200 201 and up County Employees by Zipcode* Public Ways & Facilities Education General Government Public Assistance Public Protection Other Orinda Lafayette Clayton Moraga Concord Danville Martinez Pleasant Hill SanRamon Walnut Creek Alamo Blackhawk CaminoTassajara Diablo Pacheco Brentwood Oakley Antioch Pittsburg Bay Point Bethel Island Byron Clyde DiscoveryBay Knightsen Pinole Richmond San Pablo ElCerrito 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 !!!!! !!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !!! !!!! !!! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!!! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !!!! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! !! !!! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !!!! ! !! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! Exhibit 5.5. Employee survey responses to “How do you, or did you, typically get to the County office?” and “How would you prefer to get to the County office in the future?” Exhibit 5.7. Employee survey responses to “What is or was your average commute time to the County office?” Source: Gensler administered Contra Costa County Employee Survey, October - November 2021. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. TRANSPORTATION MODE CURRENT FUTURE Car (Drive Alone, Carpool, Car Service)94%73% Public Transit (Subway/Metro, Bus, Train)2%7% County-Sponsored Shuttle 0%7% Bicycle 1%5% Walk 2%4% Other 1%5% Exhibit 5.6. Employee home locations DEPARTMENT WEST COUNTY CENTRAL COUNTY EAST COUNTY OUTSIDE COUNTY Employee home locations 12%34%29%25% County facility locations 21%61%18%0% 57% 9% 34% ≤ 30 minutes 31 - 60 minutes 61+ minutes WEST CENTRAL EAST 97Gensler Employee & Department Experience - Employee Transportation Department Headcount Growth Department leaders expect employee headcounts to grow by 19% in the next 8 years based on anticipated growth in County population, changes in regulatory requirements, and changes to funding. This factors into optimizing effectiveness of individual facilities, departmental adjacencies, and employee hybrid work strategies. Methodology »Health Services, Fire, and Sheriff were excluded. »The projections also exclude temporary staff from part- time help, special projects, interns, or seasonal workloads. »Headcount is projected to grow to 4,819 by year 2030. »By functional group, Public Protection and Public Assistance project the largest growth. Education projects zero growth. »By department, Information Technology and Animal Services anticipate the largest growth. »Library, Treasurer-Tax Collector and Veterans Service expect to remain at current staffing levels. »Department leaders noted future headcount needs stem from program or technology-related positions. Findings »Some departments are currently understaffed due to vacancies or budget cuts in previous years. »Many departments require space to accommodate headcount fluctuations. Contra Costa County | Final Report Notes: * Assuming 2020 headcount as 2025 was not provided. Exhibit 5.8. Projected County FTE Positions (2020-2030) Source: Gensler administered Contra Costa County Department Leadership Questionnaire and Interviews, October – December 2021. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Exhibit 5.10. Current and Projected County FTE Positions by Department (2020-2030) DEPARTMENT 2020 HEADCOUNT 2025 HEADCOUNT 2030 HEADCOUNT % CHANGE (2020-2030) Agriculture 47 49 50 6% Animal Services 71 83 108 52% Assessor 112 122 132 18% Auditor-Controller 58 70 70 21% Child Support Services 134 141 141 5% Clerk-Recorder 140 150 150 7% Conservation & Development 150 175 185 23% County Administrator’s Office 25 30 30 20% County Counsel 54 57 60 11% District Attorney 219 235 251 15% Employment & Human Services 1,984 2,180 2,400 21% Human Resources 52 55 55 6% Information Technology 78 78*130 67% Library 99 99 99 0% Probation 133 170 165 24% Public Defender 154 189 222 44% Public Works 457 492 492 8% Risk Management 30 35 35 17% Treasurer-Tax Collector 30 30 30 0% Veterans Service 14 14 14 0% Total 4,041 4,454 4,819 19% Exhibit 5.9. Current and Projected County FTE Positions by Functional Group (2020-2030) FUNCTIONAL GROUP 2020 HEADCOUNT 2025 HEADCOUNT 2030 HEADCOUNT % CHANGE (2020-2030) General Government 579 627 692 20% Public Protection 837 959 1,014 21% Public Assistance 1,998 2,194 2,414 21% Public Ways and Facilities 528 575 600 14% Education 99 99 99 0% 99Gensler Employee & Department Experience - Department Headcount Growth Department Adjacencies County leadership has expressed interest in improving adjacencies to support client commutes, internal coordination, and knowledge sharing. In particular, departmental adjacencies for Social Support and Public Safety can be better supported. Methodology »For purposes of this analysis, adjacencies were categorized as follows: Essential: absolutely required Important: would increase efficiencies Convenient: should be considered but not necessary Do not collocate: remain as is »Walking distance is assumed to be a supported adjacency unless identified as essential. »Central Administration, Development, and Agriculture functional adjacencies are well- supported. »Social Support adjacencies can be better supported. EHSD, Probation, Child Support Services and Veterans Service often serve the same customer. »Public Safety and Justice adjacencies can be also better supported. District Attorney and Public Defender report important adjacencies. »County Counsel and EHSD should not be collocated due to confidentiality and security requirements. »Agriculture and Public Works should not be collocated due to conflict of interest. »Some departments that serve all County departments or constituents, such as Information Technology and Assessor, expressed no adjacency needs. Findings Contra Costa County | Final Report Source: Gensler administered Contra Costa County Department Leadership Questionnaire and Interviews, October – December 2021. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. DEPARTMENT Agriculture / Weights & MeasuresAnimal ServicesAssessorAuditor-ControllerChild Support ServicesClerk-RecorderConservation & DevelopmentCounty Administrator’s OfficeCounty CounselDistrict AttorneyEmployment & Human ServicesHuman ResourcesInformation TechnologyLibraryProbationPublic DefenderPublic WorksRisk ManagementTreasurer - Tax CollectorVeterans Service OfficeAgriculture / Weights & Measures Animal Services Assessor Auditor-Controller Child Support Services Clerk-Recorder Conservation & Development County Administrator's Office County Counsel District Attorney Employment & Human Services Human Resources Information Technology Library Probation Public Defender Public Works Risk Management Treasurer - Tax Collector Veterans Service Office Exhibit 5.11. Department leadership questionnaire responses on desired adjacencies to other County departments Essential Adjacency Important Adjacency Convenient Adjacency Do Not Collocate Currently Unsupported Legend 101Gensler Employee & Department Experience - Department Adjacencies Work Culture Employees understand the value of their work and its contribution to the community. However, departments can better celebrate individual achievements and promote trying different ways of working. Findings »76% of employee survey respondents believe maintaining company culture is about the same or easier at home compared to the office. »The majority of respondents felt that the COVID-19 pandemic had little effect on their personal or work relationships. »County employees have a clear understanding of how to do their work, share ideas with colleagues, and how their work contributes to the County’s mission. »Most respondents believe the County’s work makes a positive impact on the community and promotes diversity and inclusion. »However, only 15% believe the County has a clear strategy for innovation. »Employee recognition and work-life balance can be improved. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 5.12. Employee survey responses to “How has working during the COVID-19 pandemic affected your...?” 1: Very negatively to 5: Very positively Source: Gensler administered Contra Costa County Employee Survey, October - November 2021. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. I am aware of how my work contributes to County’s mission I find it easy to share ideas and work-in- progress with my colleagues I am empowered to experiment with new ways of working I am able to provide/receive mentoring and training My achievements are acknowledged and celebrated My commitments outside of work are respected Exhibit 5.13. Employee survey responses to “Rate your agreement with the following statements.” 1: Strongly disagree to 5: Strongly agree Exhibit 5.14. Employee survey responses to “County…” 1: Strongly disagree to 5: Strongly agree Personal creativity Relationships with colleagues Personal or family relationships Sense of community and belonging Physical health Sense of commitment to County Relationship with your manager Job satisfaction Relationships with clients/ customers ...creates a climate that continuously fosters innovation. ...encourages breakthrough ideas. ...does work that makes a positive contribution to society. ...has a clear strategy for innovation. ...has integrity. ...constantly strives to improve products and services. ...allows me to take risks at work. ...has a leadership team that encourages innovation. ...has creative thinkers. ...is considered a leader in its industry. ...is aligned with my personal values. ...promotes diversity and inclusion. 103Gensler Employee & Department Experience - Work Culture Work Collaboration Employees understand their work responsibilities and are able to collaborate effectively with colleagues within the same department. However, the County can improve cross-departmental knowledge sharing. Findings »The majority of respondents feel their work consists primarily of focused activities that can be conducted alone. In fact, 85% agree that managers trust them to get their job done. »Learning new skills is also important to the respondents’ jobs. Duties related to being onsite utilizing specific spaces or resources are considered less critical. »Focusing on individual work is how the majority of respondents spend their workday. This is followed by activities related to in- person collaboration with others. »There is high awareness of work impact within immediate teams, but knowledge sharing across County departments can be improved. Contra Costa County | Final Report I am aware of how my work impacts the work of others I am aware of what others on my team are working on I am aware of what other teams in my organization are working on Exhibit 5.17. Employee survey responses to “I am aware of..” 1: Strongly disagree to 5: Strongly agree Exhibit 5.16. Employee survey responses to “Currently, how do you spend your time working?” Exhibit 5.15. Employee survey responses to “My job relies heavily on...” 1: Strongly disagree to 5: Strongly agree Source: Gensler administered Contra Costa County Employee Survey, October - November 2021. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded.Learning new skills.In-person collaboration.Specific materials and resources location in the workplace.Being accessible and visible to people outside my team.In-person interaction with clients/public.Virtual interaction with clients/public.Virtual collaboration.Unplanned/informal interactions with colleagues.Working alone.Specific technologies located in the workplace.Specific spaces located in the workplace.105Gensler Employee & Department Experience - Work Collaboration Remote Work: Employee Experience Employee survey respondents report being more satisfied and productive when working from home. Increasing opportunities to work remotely is the highest ranked policy that employees want the County to implement. Findings »77% of employee survey respondents never worked from home prior to the COVID-19 pandemic stay- at-home orders. »Employee respondents are highly satisfied with their work from home experience (4.6 out of 5 average rating). »The home environment is more effective than the office in supporting all work activities, whether it’s virtual collaboration, education, or networking. »62% of respondents agree that remote working enables increased productivity and decreased distraction. »Being in the office supports in-person collaborative tasks, maintaining corporate culture, and allowing for more effective coaching and training participation. »55% of respondents are willing to share desks with others if that allows for more opportunities to work remotely. The remaining respondents prefer a dedicated desk, even if it means more expectations of working in the office. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 5.19. Employee survey responses to “Overall, how satisfied are you with the experience of working from home?” 1: Very dissatisfied to 5: Very satisfied Exhibit 5.20. Employee survey responses to “Compared to working in the office, are the following activities harder or easier to do at home?” 1: Much harder at home to 5: Much easier at home. Source: Gensler administered Contra Costa County Employee Survey, October - November 2021. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Exhibit 5.21. 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.” Exhibit 5.18. Employee survey responses to “Prior to the current COVID-19 pandemic, what was your experience with working remotely (at home or other locations away from the office)?” Finding time to complete your individual work Working on sensitive/confidential material Communicating with clients/customers Collaborating with others Receiving feedback on my work Participating in training provided by County Working through challenging business situations Avoiding distractions Staying up-to-date with what others are working on Maintaining corporate culture Participating in coach/mentoring Establish different team days/schedules to come to the office to manage exposure Implement stricter policies against coming in to the workplace when sick Other (please specify) Increase virtual meetings in place of business travel Adopt a shift-schedule or a wider variety of working hours Expand new virtual collaboration strategies Increase opportunities to work remotely Provide a stipend for alternative transportation to the office (to avoid using public/mass transit) Provide/expand a reservation system for shared desks and meeting rooms Add infrared temperature screening to the workplace 107Gensler Employee & Department Experience - Remote Work: Employee Experience Remote Work: Departmental Expectations While 50% of employee respondents would prefer to work in the office 2 days a week or less, most department leaders would prefer their teams to be in office 3 days a week or more. The County should consider optimizing its remote working policy based on the needs of employees and their work activities. »The current BOS-approved remote work policy is 2.5 days a week. However, department leaders and employees differ on the number of days needed in the office to be work effectively. »Human Resources and Child Support Services anticipate needing to work in the office least frequently at 1.5 days a week. »The nature of work may require more in-person interaction with customers or County colleagues and travel to various locations, etc. Specific roles may need to be reviewed on a case-by- case basis. »Some respondents believe on-site work drives productivity, culture, morale, better training, and stronger work relationships. Department Analysis Department Leaders »Some jobs require use of technology or equipment only found in facilities. »There is concern that remote working places more burden on employees who are required to be on site. »Veterans Service and Conservation & Development offer virtual services and anticipate needing to work in the office 2 days a week. »Library, Treasurer-Tax Collector, Probation, Clerk of the Board, and Animal Services anticipate needing to work in the office most frequently at 3.5 – 4 days a week. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 5.23. Employee survey responses to “How many days a week do you need to be in the office in order to be effective in your role?” Indicated by the clustered bars compared to department leader responses indicated by the vertical black line. Source: Gensler administered Contra Costa County Employee Survey & Department Leadership Questionnaire, October – November 2021. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded.1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 Child Support Services Human Resources Conservation & Development Information Technology Veterans Service Office Assessor Employment & Human Services Finance Public Works Risk Management Agriculture / Weights & Measures Auditor-Controller Clerk-Recorder County Counsel District Attorney Office of the County Administrator Public Defender Animal Services Clerk of the Board Probation Treasurer - Tax Collector Library 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 Child Support Services Human Resources Conservation & Development Information Technology Veterans Service Office Assessor Employment & Human Services Finance Public Works Risk Management Agriculture / Weights & Measures Auditor-Controller Clerk-Recorder County Counsel District Attorney Office of the County Administrator Public Defender Animal Services Clerk of the Board Probation Treasurer - Tax Collector Library 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 Child Support Services Human Resources Conservation & Development Information Technology Veterans Service Office Assessor Employment & Human Services Finance Public Works Risk Management Agriculture / Weights & Measures Auditor-Controller Clerk-Recorder County Counsel District Attorney Office of the County Administrator Public Defender Animal Services Clerk of the Board Probation Treasurer - Tax Collector Library Library Treasurer - Tax Collector Probation Animal Services Human Resources Child Support Services Employee Survey Department Questionnaire 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 Current Policy Exhibit 5.22. Employee and leadership survey responses to “How many days a week in the office would people need to work effectively?” Employee Survey Department Questionnaire 109Gensler Employee & Department Experience - Remote Work: Departmental Expectations Contra Costa County | Final Report 06 RECOMMENDATIONS 111Gensler Overview 112 Portfolio-Wide 113 Service Centers 130 Expected Outcomes 140 This chapter provides comprehensive portfolio-wide and location- specific recommendations for County properties over a twenty-year implementation horizon. They represent a culmination of the research, analysis, and thinking outlined in the previous chapters of this report. Methodology The Project Team’s approach to developing recommendations is based on: »The County’s expectations and directives as defined by the scope of services. »The need to employ a comprehensive methodology that leads to both long- term plans and short-term real property solutions. »A clear understanding of existing conditions, which affect the content and implementation of the Plan. Overview »The Guiding Principles established in collaboration with the Steering Committee at the onset of the project. »The Project Team’s professional experience in evaluating and balancing opportunities and hurdles. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Portfolio-Wide Improve Customer and Employee Spaces 03 Expand Virtual and Mobile Services for Customers 06 Consolidate Portfolio and Optimize Facility Management 02 Introduce Modern and Efficient Space Standards 05 Support Housing Development 08 Collocate Complementary Departments at Regional Service Centers 01 Support Flexible Work 04 07 Strengthen Safety and Security These eight recommendations should be considered for the overall portfolio. Please see the following pages for more detail. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 113Gensler Recommendations - Portfolio-Wide Department silos have led to ad-hoc additions of disparate facilities for many departments, forcing clients to visit multiple locations to access services. Collocating departments can help improve service responsiveness and camaraderie, drive greater efficiency through shared resources and economies of scale, and reduce customer and employee travel. Recommendations »Create Regional Service Centers in West, Central, and East County. These one-stop campuses co-locate departments for increased collaboration and resource sharing, and for the public to access different services in one convenient location. Typical features include a common entry to County services, community space, access to public transit, common staff support spaces, private suites for departments with confidentiality needs, and employee drop-in spaces. »Introduce a mix of department-specific suites and shared spaces. Consolidate frequently used services in proposed Service Center locations, but ensure adequate privacy for departments with sensitive information (e.g. Public Defender). Create space savings by providing shared spaces for common resources (e.g. pantries, security, mail, copy/print, etc.). »Include drop-in spaces for other departments with a mix of offices, meeting rooms, and workstations that can accommodate 10-15 people at any given time. »Position facilities as vibrant community hubs and recognizable “front doors” to County services. Leverage the larger footprint generated by collocating multiple departments and develop an identifiable and unique facade design. Make the Service Centers attractive and useful resources for communities by providing a mix of uses (e.g. event spaces, retail, walking trails). »Leverage footprints to introduce more public transit options. Consider collaborating with other proximate non-County employers to identify a critical mass of ridership for a public bus stop or private shuttles. Paid parking could be an effective strategy to help fund expanded public transit access. »Expand Animal Service outside Martinez. Consider adding physical and field/ mobile services to West County and East County to better serve hard-to-reach populations. Conduct a comprehensive needs assessment to identify future needs and explore partnership opportunities with existing providers in expansion regions. CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE GUIDING PRINCIPLES SUPPORTED: COLLAB & SHARING Collocate Complementary Departments at Regional Service Centers 01 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Source: Gensler Project Benchmarking, Sept - Oct 2021 Exhibit 6.1. Service Center Examples Zev Yaroslavsky Family Support Center, LA County »7 Depts: Public Social Services, Children and Family Services, Child Support Services, Probation, Public Health, Health Services, and Mental Health Eden Area Multi-Service Center, Alameda County »6 Depts: Social Services Agency, Rehabilitation, Library, Employment Development, Center for Education and Careers, Adult and Career Education Administration Building, LA County »4 Depts: Public Social Services, Mental Health, Child Support Services, Children & Family Services South County Service Center, Santa Cruz County »4 Depts: Career Center, Child Support Services, Agricultural Commissioner’s Office, Adult and Juvenile Probation 115Gensler Recommendations - Overview REAL ESTATE COSTS GUIDING PRINCIPLES SUPPORTED: The County’s real property portfolio has grown organically over time without a clear strategy, and management of this portfolio is increasingly difficult. Portfolio consolidation can help realize significant work process and real estate efficiencies. Recommendations »Reduce the number of leased facilities. Ideally, long-term or permanent functions should be housed in County-owned facilities. Leasing should be reserved for short-term programs (less than 10 years), programs embedded within other organizations, programs that can receive significant reimbursements for leasing space, and programs with significant location or cost limitations. Additionally, the County should avoid NNN leases in favor for full service gross leases where the landlord is responsible for maintenance and repairs. »Balance consolidation and distribution. Contra Costa County is the ninth most populous county in California and one of the most diverse. To serve such a diverse and dispersed population, the County must have a wide network of easily accessible facilities. There are significant work process and real estate efficiencies that can be gained by consolidation and co-location. Overall, the County should balance the distributed service needs of specific programs with the benefits of consolidation. This means creating and strengthening County service centers whenever possible, especially for facilities currently proximate to each other, while maintaining distributed service locations as needed. Using both models supports a unified approach to delivering services County-wide. »Implement a Central Real Estate Inventory and Facility Management Tool. Public Works should partner with Information Technology to create or adopt a recognized asset management/database software system that at a minimum is linked to the County’s GIS system, Assessor’s data, the overall real estate portfolio, and financial systems. »Establish a new Capital Improvement Planning Process that prioritizes projects based on quantitative/qualitative cost/benefit analyses and funding sources. Create a Steering Committee comprised of directors/staff from Public Works, Finance, and the County Administrator’s Office. The County Administrator and District Supervisors should also be included or at a minimum debriefed on recommended actions the Committee proposes. Consolidate Portfolio and Optimize Facility Management 02 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report REGION NO.LEASED FACILITY ADDRESS DEPARTMENT DISPOSE?REASON West 1 1535 Fred Jackson Way, Richmond EHSD Yes Ideal for consolidated services at the West County Service Center21275 Hall Ave, Richmond EHSD Yes 3 2101 Vale Rd, San Pablo Veterans Service Yes Ideal for consolidated services at the West County Service Center 4 3095 Richmond Pkwy Richmond Probation No Probation wants to maintain the facility due to proximity to key users 5 991 Loring Ave, Crockett Library No Library may want to consider buying the facility eventually 6 11780 San Pablo Ave, El Cerrito Board of Supervisors No Maintains a flexible portfolio for Supervisors Central 7 3685 Mt Diablo Blvd, Lafayette DCD Yes Ideal for consolidated DCD services at the Central Planning, Development, and Storage Center 8 777 Arnold Dr, Martinez Library Yes Ideal sharing storage resources at the Central Planning, Development, and Storage Center 9 2250 Galaxy Ct, Concord Clerk-Recorder Yes Ideal for consolidated storage at the Central Planning, Development, and Storage Center 10 2600 Stanwell, Concord EHSD Yes Training center would be ideal in a centralized location at the Central County Service Center 11 2380 Bisso Ln, Ste A, Concord Agriculture Yes Ideal for consolidated services at the Central Planning, Development, and Storage Center 12 4061 Port Chicago Hwy, Concord DPW Yes Ideal for consolidated storage at the Central Planning, Development, and Storage Center 13 4071 Port Chicago Hwy, Concord EHSD Yes Ideal for consolidated services at the Central County Service Center141470 Civic Dr, Concord EHSD Yes 15 3755 Alhambra, Martinez EHSD Yes 16 1875 Arnold Dr, Martinez EHSD Yes 17 1330 Arnold Dr, Martinez DA Yes Ideal for consolidated services at the Central County Service Center181330 Arnold Dr, Martinez CAO Office Yes 19 627 Ferry St, Martinez DA Yes Ideal for upcoming facility at 650 Pine St 20 611 Las Juntas St, Martinez DA Yes DA wants to eventually dispose this facility 21 300 Ellinwood Way, Pleasant Hill EHSD No Good location outside Martinez, reimbursed up to 94%, helps maintain a flexible portfolio22400 Ellinwood Way, Pleasant Hill EHSD No 23 500 Ellinwood Way, Pleasant Hill EHSD No 24 610 Marina Vista Ave, Martinez Clerk-Recorder No Clerk-Recorder wants to maintain some leased storage facilities to maintain a flexible storage portfolio25620 Marina Vista Ave, Martinez Clerk-Recorder No 26 2151 Salvio St, Concord Board of Supervisors No Maintains a flexible portfolio for Supervisors27309 Diablo Rd, Danville Board of Supervisors No East 28 151 Sand Creek Rd, Brentwood EHSD Yes Ideal for consolidated services at the East County Service Center 29 3361 Walnut Blvd, Brentwood Veterans Service Yes Ideal for consolidated services at the East County Service Center 30 3017 Walnut Blvd, Brentwood DPW No Maintains a flexible portfolio for DPW313017 Walnut Blvd, Brentwood DPW No 32 3020 Second St, Knightsen Agriculture No Maintains a flexible portfolio for Agriculture and serves farmers nearby 33 3103 Willow Pass Rd, Bay Point EHSD No Good location in North-East County, reimbursed up to 94%, helps maintain a flexible portfolio343105 Willow Pass Rd, Bay Point EHSD No 35 3361 Walnut Blvd, Brentwood Board of Supervisors No Maintains a flexible portfolio for Supervisors36190E 4th St, Pittsburg Board of Supervisors No Exhibit 6.2. Leased Facilities to Consider for Consolidation with Other Facilities/Service Centers & Disposition 117Gensler Recommendations - Overview CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE GUIDING PRINCIPLES SUPPORTED: EMPLOYEE EXPERIENCE With a few exceptions, the County’s facilities are generally in fair-to-poor condition. Improving facilities can help improve service delivery, employee wellbeing and retention, and attract the next generation of County employees. Recommendations »Develop a Facility Condition Assessment and improvement strategy and process. The County should establish a framework and process to routinely conduct facility assessments, similar to the ongoing work with Gordian, to ensure that all systems are functioning. The County should also establish a strategy and process for making improvements. One strategy could be to prioritize improvements for the facilities in “Poor” or “Deficient” condition as identified in exhibit 6.3. For the purpose of the master plan, the County advised Gensler to prioritize facilities with a facility condition index (“FCI”) score of 0.5+ for improvements. »Develop accessible and professional environments. The 2020 American Community Survey demonstrated that over 11% of the County’s population has disability needs and 35% speak a language other than English at home. It is important that County facilities be safe, universally accessible, well-maintained, and healthful environments for both the public and employees. Visitor parking should be ample and convenient. Facilities should ideally be located within easy access to public transportation. »Ensure that all campuses with more than one facility have clear way-finding and paths of travel. All facilities should be easy and intuitive to navigate, have barrier- free routes, and sufficient way-finding. For example, the Board of Supervisors noted that the 845 Brookside Dr, Richmond campus can benefit from clearer way-finding and paths of travel. Improve Customer and Employee Spaces 03 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report OWNED FACILITY ADDRESS DEPARTMENT FCI SCORE 1330 Arnold Dr, Martinez DA 0.537 2935 Pinole Valley Rd, Pinole Library 0.539 2661 Oak Grove Rd, Walnut Creek Library 0.544 255 Glacier Dr (Storage), Martinez PWD 0.561 4491 Bixler Rd, Byron Probation 0.562 2475 Waterbird Way Bldg C, Martinez PWD 0.597 220 Glacier Dr, Martinez Many departments 0.654 3105 Willow Pass Rd, Bay Point EHSD 0.663 627 Ferry St, Martinez PD 0.682 2380 Bisso Ln, Ste A, Concord Agriculture 0.734 1535 Fred Jackson Way, Richmond EHSD 0.742 2471 Waterbird Way, Martinez PWD 0.774 3017 Walnut Blvd, Brentwood PWD 0.803 1275 Hall Ave, Richmond EHSD 0.875 3017 Walnut Blvd, Brentwood PWD 1.045 Exhibit 6.4. Owned Facilities with FCI Score of 0.5+Exhibit 6.3. FCI Score A Facility Condition Index (“FCI”) is simply the ratio of the cost of an asset’s improvements identified as needed over the years (“Requirements”) divided by the asset’s calculated replacement value (“CRV”) and expressed as a decimal fraction of one. The FCI is an indicator of condition and can be used to benchmark facility conditions along consistent, industry standards. The methodology is based on International Facility Managers Association (“IFMA”) definitions. The lower an asset’s FCI value, the better the building’s overall condition is assumed to be. 5 Year Facility Condition Index Scale Excellent Good Fair Poor Deficient Near-Term Requirement & Systems Renewal Costs Asset Current Replacement Value 119Gensler Recommendations - Overview The COVID-19 pandemic forced many organizations, including the County, to largely adopt a remote work policy for its employees. Due to high levels of employee satisfaction across the public and private sector, organizations are now evaluating long-term remote work policies and shared seating. A permanent remote work program can help lower real estate footprint and costs, allowing increased funding towards remote work technology and tools. Recommendations »Increase remote work for functions that can support it. Some roles are better suited for remote work than others. The County should establish clear role criteria for remote work and consider increasing it beyond the County’s current policy (50% of the work week) for roles that can support it. Ensure that roles that cannot be remote are appropriately supported in the workplace. »Develop an intentional remote program managed by a dedicated team. The County should establish a dedicated remote work team that oversees the implementation of remote work for all departments. The team should include representation from the CAO, Human Resources, Information Technology, and Public Works. The County’s remote program should provide guidance for the following factors. • Customer service impact • Roles, responsibilities, and expectations • Policy and procedures • Virtual and in-office technology and IT support • Staff and manager training (technology, remote work, etc.) • Norms for collaboration and socialization • Remote team management »Introduce seat sharing. For departments or groups of employees who significantly work remotely, shifting from assigning one seat for one employee to allowing multiple employees to share seats could result in better office utilization, space reductions, and cost savings for other programs. Adding flexible drop-in spaces to County facilities in different regions could be a valuable amenity for County employees who want to work closer to their homes. »Increase collaboration spaces. With meetings and collaboration being the key reasons to visit the workplace, the County should increase collaboration spaces and ensure sufficient technology for hybrid (virtual and in-person) collaboration. Support Flexible Work 04 GUIDING PRINCIPLES SUPPORTED: EMPLOYEE EXPERIENCE REAL ESTATE COSTS Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 6.5. Recommended Levels of Remote Work »Child Support Services »Information Technology »Library »Human Resources »Veterans Services 60% REMOTE 5 staff share 2 seats Departments Recommended: Onsite 2 days per week 10% additional collaboration space assumed 2:5:1 Ratio »Animal Services »Assessor »Clerk »County Counsel »Conservation and Development »Employment and Human Services »Probation »Treasurer - Tax Collector 40% REMOTE 3 staff share 2 seats Departments Recommended: Onsite 3 days per week 5% additional collaboration space assumed 1:5:1 Ratio 0 -30% REMOTE No seat sharing assumed Departments Recommended: Onsite 4-5 days per week No additional collaboration space assumed »Agriculture »Auditor - Controller »County Administrator’s Office »District Attorney »Public Defender »Public Works »Risk Management 1:1 Ratio (Staff : Seat) Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 121Gensler Recommendations - Overview Existing facilities were designed by departments independently and vary widely in layout, environmental conditions, and allocation. Creating consistent space standards will establish equality across departments, improve real estate utilization, and allow for more flexibility in space and move planning. Recommendations »Utilize modern, efficient, and consistent space standards, including consistently- sized work and collaborative spaces. This approach creates equity across departments and helps the County respond to change more easily by moving people instead of walls or workstations. A space guideline of 190 USF per person or 230 GSF per person for typical office functions when planning future renovations or new construction is recommended. »Create new County-wide office design guidelines. Align on space planning processes and standards for all office facilities moving forward. Document best practices from the newest County facilities at 1025 Escobar and 651 Pine in Martinez. That document will be a resource for departments seeking office changes as well as design partners. »Adjust space layouts to accommodate activity-based work. Realign space layouts to support all types of work. Incorporate new collaboration and conference spaces into space plans to maximize efficiency for collaboration between onsite and offsite employees. Allow flexibility for departments with specific work patterns to adopt layouts that best support their needs. This could include a variety of open and enclosed focus and collaboration spaces accessible to all roles. »Collocate support spaces and provide common areas for employee socialization. Plan for shared amenity and support spaces for multiple departments on the same floor or in the same building to optimize real estate and support impromptu encounters with colleagues from other departments. Consider the sizing, travel distances, and provisions of these common spaces. Introduce Modern and Efficient Space Standards 05 GUIDING PRINCIPLES SUPPORTED: EMPLOYEE EXPERIENCE REAL ESTATE COSTS Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 6.8. Traditional vs Activity-Based Space Layout Exhibit 6.7. Workstation Variation Across Facilities Modern Workstations at 1025 EscobarExtra Large Workstations in Older Facilities Exhibit 6.6. Recommended Space Planning Standards for Typical Office Functions USF/Person GSF/Person 190 230 123Gensler Recommendations - Overview CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE TECH ADOPTION GUIDING PRINCIPLES SUPPORTED: The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance and growing popularity of virtual and mobile services to the County’s service delivery operations. Continue offering these alternative platforms, strengthen technology infrastructure, and expand virtual service to more departments. Recommendations »Audit the effectiveness of current virtual services and make strategic improvements. Evaluate the quality, operations, and customer satisfaction of existing virtual services. Make strategic improvements to the customer and employee experience for long-term service delivery. Develop a County-wide virtual service delivery playbook for all departments. »Conduct a County-wide service needs assessment and identify additional virtual service opportunities. Assess all department services and determine which services can also be offered virtually in the future. Align on the best platforms and hours to serve customers, and adjust department workflows and staffing to accommodate service needs. »Introduce mobile services for new and growing geographies as well as for large employers of government customers. Expand outreach and bring department services to customers, especially in regions lacking County facilities or waiting for facilities to be renovated or built. Collaborate with other non-County large employers or groups to organize pop-up events as needed. »Strengthen technology to support virtual service delivery and remote work. Improve technology infrastructure to better support the hybrid work environment. This includes the teleworking technology, software platforms, and meeting spaces to conduct virtual work inside and outside the office. Conduct training to help employees and customers adapt to new technologies. »Create a County-wide virtual service delivery platform. Establish a virtual environment where County employees can assist customers online. This immersive environment will compliment in-person service at physical addresses and may impact long term operations. Additional study is required to assess feasibility. Expand Virtual and Mobile Services for Customers 06 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 6.9. Recommended Virtual and Mobile Services Online Paperless Documentation and E-Signatures Implemented by departments individually Online Services Provided by EHSD and Veterans Services; Requested by Information Technology and Library Public Access to Wifi Inside and Outside Facilities Requested by Information Technology and Library »Standardize County-wide cloud management and e-signature systems »Update paperless documentation and storage policies and protocols »Reevaluate public interaction platforms and service availability during and outside business hours »Increase Information Technology staffing to assist departments or create a County-wide virtual service delivery platform »Add self-service computer kiosks to all customer-facing County facilities »Expand public wifi to more outdoor spaces (e.g. parks) »Partner with non-County public facilities like City and State buildings, etc. Field/Mobile Services (e.g. Vans) Currently being evaluated by Animal Services; desired by EHSD »Allow customers to request field services on demand »Bring mobile services to populations located away from County facilities »Add a fleet of shared mobile vans for temporary or seasonal activities 125Gensler Recommendations - Overview County employees have reported safety concerns, confidentiality needs, theft, and parking issues at various facilities. Safety and security standards should be implemented across the County’s portfolio, providing a safe and comfortable environment for all County employees and customers. Recommendations »Adopt standardized access control to all County buildings. Access control across County properties varies significantly. Adopting standardized access controls, such as a universal key card access, can help to facilitate sharing of resources across departments. Doing so will also allow the County to more easily manage the security of its buildings in a coordinated manner. »Harden boundaries between public-facing and staff-only areas. Locate public- facing spaces close to the lobby, separate from employee-only areas and on lower floors if possible. In a typical floor, consider confining all public spaces to one portion of the floor. The employee-only sections of the floor should be access controlled. Provide clear signage so customers understand which spaces are publicly accessible and which are off-limits. »Provide secure and well-lit parking. Ensure that all visitors and employees have easy access to secure parking lots and structures, especially the ones with fleet vehicles parked onsite overnight. Consider adding fencing, video surveillance, and guards to all County parking facilities to deter theft and vandalism. »Add “eyes on the street.” Increasing the amount of activity around County assets could be used as a crime prevention tool. While this is not practical in more suburban locations, introducing or collocating with mixed-use developments can attract additional visitors before, during and after business hours. Strengthen Safety and Security 07 CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE GUIDING PRINCIPLES SUPPORTED: EMPLOYEE EXPERIENCE Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 6.10. Recommended Security Standards Access control for department officesAccess control for facility entrances Gated parking lot 127Gensler Recommendations - Overview CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE GUIDING PRINCIPLES SUPPORTED: County leadership has identified housing as a key priority to help alleviate housing shortage and the increase in homelessness. Preliminary analysis of vacant parcels and facilities indicates that the County owns approximately 40 acres of vacant land. The County can help meet the housing demand by redeveloping many of these underutilized County-owned assets. Recommendations »Explore potential for housing development across underutilized County-owned sites. Conducting due diligence on sites with high potential can help to spur private developer interest. While the focus can be on providing affordable housing, some amount of market-rate housing along with other revenue-generating uses may be needed to support financial feasibility. »Engage with the development community to better understand private sector concerns and requirements with an emphasis on informal interactions outside of the formal RFP/RFQ processes. Gaining this knowledge will help to demonstrate the County’s ability to be a productive development partner, yielding higher-quality projects that better meet County expectations. Support Housing Development 08 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report ! !!!!!! ! ! ! !!!!!! Orinda Lafayette Clayton Moraga Concord Danville Martinez Pleasant Hill San Ramon Walnut Creek 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 Region Boundaries Vacant (County Owned) Source: ESRI, Contra Costa County SELECTED VACANT PARCELS ACRES West County 1515 Market Ave, San Pablo (facility)2,623 sf Central County None Arnold Drive, Martinez 13.36 East County None Technology Way, Brentwood 2.82 None Delta Fair, Antioch 4.79 None Byron Hot Springs Rd, Byron 15.45 28, 30 & 34 Drake, Antioch 0.39 None Marsh Creek Rd, Brentwood 1.4 Exhibit 6.11. Selected Vacant Parcels WEST CENTRAL EAST Select Vacant Parcels (County Owned) Region Boundaries 129Gensler Recommendations - Overview Service Centers The following pages outline key goals, actions, and considerations for three new County service centers and a fourth consolidation at Waterbird Way. While specific locations have been identified for most of the service centers, the County should investigate the feasibility of leasing or purchasing existing facilities and weigh the benefits before initiating construction. ! !! ! Orinda Lafayette Clayton Moraga Concord Danville Martinez Pleasant Hill San Ramon Walnut Creek 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 PortCostaRodeo Alameda County San Joaquin County Sacramento CountySolano County Napa County Sonoma County Marin County San Francisco County San Mateo County East Service Center West Service Center Central Service & Storage Centers Region Boundaries Source: ESRI, Contra Costa County Exhibit 6.12. Map of Recommended Service Centers RECOMMENDED SERVICE CENTERS ACRES West County West County Service Center at San Pablo Ave Corridor (Location TBD) TBD Central County Central County Service Center at Arnold Drive 20.82 Central County Planning, Development and Storage Center at Waterbird Way 27.46 East County East County Service Center at Technology Way 2.82 Benefits »Improve customer experience with a “one-stop shop” approach for multiple County services »Provide better access for customers »Reduce the number of facilities in the County’s portfolio »Improve workspaces and the overall employee experience »Increase resource sharing between departments WEST CENTRAL EAST Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 6.13. Recommended Departments at Service Centers East County Service Center Technology Way, Brentwood The County’s Technology Way parcel in Brentwood has been identified for the East County Service Center: »Significant vacant County-owned land for development »Convenient location for customers throughout East County »Proximate to retail »Well-liked location that was considered for a Regional Service Center in 2011 West County Service Center San Pablo Ave Corridor A location in the San Pablo Avenue corridor (to be identified) proximate to the West County Health Clinic is preferred for the West County Service Center. »Proximate to bus stops and freeway »Easily identifiable location where customers access a variety of services in one location Planning, Development, and Storage Center Waterbird Way, Martinez Central County Service Center Arnold Dr, Martinez The Waterbird Way campus has been identified for the Planning, Development, and Storage Center: »A large County-owned parcel with significant vacant land »A high concentration of Public Works and Animal Services staff already present »A central location for departments to access storage 2530 Arnold Drive, Martinez has been identified as an ideal location for the Central County Service Center: »A large County-owned parcel with significant vacant land »Proximate to bus stops »Well-liked location that was considered for the County Administration building »A high concentration of County staff already present Departments Recommended: PUBLIC ASSISTANCE »Employment & Human Services »Veterans Service GENERAL GOVERNMENT »Clerk-Recorder Departments Recommended:Departments Recommended:Departments Recommended: PUBLIC ASSISTANCE »Employment & Human Services »Veteran Services PUBLIC PROTECTION »District Attorney »Child Support Services »Probation GENERAL GOVERNMENT »Assessor »Information Technology »County Administrator’s Office (PBX Case Management) »Risk Management PUBLIC ASSISTANCE »Employment & Human Services »Veterans Service PUBLIC PROTECTION »Public Defender GENERAL GOVERNMENT »Clerk-Recorder PUBLIC PROTECTION »Agriculture »Conservation & Development PUBLIC WAYS AND FACILITIES »Public Works OTHER (STORAGE) »Multiple departments EDUCATION »Library PUBLIC PROTECTION »Animal Services 131Gensler Recommendations - Service Centers West County Service Center at San Pablo Avenue Corridor (Location TBD) 01 A new multi-department facility near San Pablo Avenue will be closer to West County customers, employees, and more public transit service providers. This option allows the County to dispose of multiple properties in Richmond, consolidate complementary EHSD and Veterans Service functions, and provide an outpost for Clerk-Recorder. Goals Recommendations »Support a “one-stop shop” for West County Public Assistance services »Reduce the number of facilities in the County’s portfolio »Improve workspaces and the overall employee experience »Acquire a new site along San Pablo Ave Corridor, preferably near the West County Health Center, to help customers access a range of services in one location. »Relocate EHSD and Veterans Service employees from 1275 Hall Ave, 1535 Fred Jackson Way, 1305 MacDonald Ave, and 2101 Vale Rd to the new site. »Develop a common customer reception space with multiple service counters, if possible, to help customers easily learn about the variety of services available and to optimize space utilization. »Consider providing a shared service counter and drop-in spaces for other services that may not need to be available all days of the week (e.g. Auditor-Controller). »Consider outdoor and indoor public spaces like retail, event spaces, etc., that can help activate the campus, benefit the community, and provide the County alternate sources of revenue. »Consider providing open workspaces and shared amenity and storage spaces for all employees unless they need to be separated for confidentiality reasons. »Consider supportive housing or other uses for 1305 MacDonald Ave. »Demolish/expand 1305 MacDonald Ave, Richmond to accommodate the program ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATIONS 158 STAFF Moving from leased facilities 218 STAFF Moving from owned facilities EHSD EHSD Exhibit 6.14. Staff Moves 376 TOTAL STAFF Veterans Service Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report DEPARTMENT 2020 STAFF 2030 STAFF REMOTE % 2030 SEATS New Facility; Construct; 85K SF (seat sharing) - 118K SF (no sharing) EHSD 374 40%250 Clerk-Recorder TBD 0%TBD Veterans Service 2 0%2 Total Parking Stalls Needed: 340 - 472 (County Code) DISPOSED FACILITIES DEPARTMENT OWNERSHIP 1275 Hall Ave, Richmond EHSD Leased 1535 Fred Jackson Way, Richmond EHSD Leased 2101 Vale Rd, San Pablo Veterans Service Leased 1305 MacDonald Ave, Richmond EHSD Owned Exhibit 6.15. West County Service Center Campus Map (Size TBD)Exhibit 6.16. West County Service Center Campus Program Exhibit 6.17. Disposed Facilities (staff relocated to West County Service Center) Sa n P a b l o A v e 1 mi radiu s West County Health Center Buses AC Transit 133Gensler Recommendations - Service Centers 1 Chart Title Central County Service Center at 2530 Arnold Drive, Martinez 02 Leverage the vacant County-owned parcel adjacent to 2530 Arnold Drive and position the campus as the Public Assistance and Protection hub for Central County. This option will consolidate staff from other Martinez facilities, allowing the County to dispose of 10 leased and owned facilities. Goals Recommendations »Support a “one-stop shop” for Central County Public Assistance and Protection services »Reduce the number of facilities in the County’s portfolio »Respond to housing demand »Leverage the vacant County-owned land adjacent to 2530 Arnold Drive to consolidate staff from facilities dispersed across Martinez. »Ensure sufficient wayfinding and privacy to accommodate the variety of public and non-public-facing departments recommended for this service center. »Provide shared customer reception, amenity, and storage spaces for complementary departments. »Update the existing facility at 2530 Arnold Drive to accommodate modern and efficient workplace standards and a growing headcount. »Ensure sufficient security from climate and disaster for the Data Center. Consider sustainable and energy efficient sources to maintain the Data Center. »Consider outdoor and indoor public spaces like retail and co-working spaces, etc., that can help activate the campus, benefit the community, and provide the County alternate sources of revenue. »Convert the land that may not be needed for County use at 2530 Arnold Drive and the vacated Douglas Drive to other uses. »Relocate Library Administration to this Service Center (instead of Waterbird Way) »Develop this program at the Douglas Drive campus in Martinez and convert Arnold Drive into housing ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATIONS 256 STAFF Moving from leased facilities 614 STAFF Moving from owned facilities 217 STAFF Growing in place EHSD DCSS Probation EHSD DoIT DA, Veterans Service EHSD Assessor Risk Management Exhibit 6.18. Staff Moves 1,087 TOTAL STAFF DA & CAO Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Surface Parking Ground- Mounted Solar Buses (0.1 mi) Tri Delta Transit State Hi g h w a y 4 Arnold Dr P a c h e c o B l v d 2530 Arnold FCI=0.325 EHSD, Assessor, Risk Management Potential Development Area DEPARTMENT 2020 STAFF 2030 STAFF REMOTE % 2030 SEATS Existing Facility; Densify; 115,091 SF Assessor 112 132 40%88 EHSD 50 50 40%33 Risk Management 30 35 0%35 New Facility; Construct; 173K SF (seat sharing) - 253K SF (no sharing) EHSD 435 40%290 DoIT 130 60%52 Probation 105 40%70 DCSS 135 40%90 Veterans Service 10 60%4 DA 49 0%49 PbK Staff (EHSD & DA)6 0%6 Library 55 60%22 Drop-In Workspaces 10 0%10 Total Parking Stalls Needed: 692 - 1,012 (County Code) DISPOSED FACILITIES DEPARTMENT OWNERSHIP 10 Douglas Dr, Martinez Veterans Service, DA Owned 30 Douglas Dr, Martinez DoIT Owned 40 Douglas Dr, Martinez EHSD Owned 50 Douglas Dr, Martinez Probation, DCSS Owned 4071 Port Chicago Hwy, Concord EHSD Leased 1470 Civic Dr, Concord EHSD Leased 3755 Alhambra, Martinez EHSD Leased 1875 Arnold Dr, Martinez EHSD Leased 1330 Arnold Dr, Martinez DA, CAO Leased 2600 Stanwell, Concord EHSD Leased Exhibit 6.19. Arnold Drive Campus Map (20.82 Acres)Exhibit 6.20. Arnold Drive Campus Program Exhibit 6.21. Disposed Facilities (staff relocated to Arnold Drive Campus) 135Gensler Recommendations - Service Centers PWD PWD DCD Animal Services Library Agriculture Planning, Development and Storage Center at Waterbird Way, Martinez 03 Renovate existing and build new facilities for Agriculture, Conservation & Development, and Public Works staff at Waterbird Way in Martinez. Public Works can consolidate operations, storage, fleet, and staff at a single location by redeveloping and expanding the existing site. Multiple properties can be disposed of for alternative uses. Goals Recommendations »Support a “one-stop shop” for Public Works, Conservation & Development, and Agriculture »Reduce the number of facilities in the County’s portfolio »Improve workspaces and the overall employee experience »Increase resource sharing and storage between departments »Leverage the vacant land at Waterbird Way currently occupied by ground mounted solar and/or leased to other organizations to support staff from Public Works and other complementary departments. Consider utilizing the total 27.46-acre parcel that includes 4800 Imhoff Pl and develop a new site master plan to more efficiently use the campus. »Introduce a multi-department storage facility to consolidate storage dispersed across the County in leased and owned facilities. Consider including storage from Sheriff and Health Service departments. »Accommodate departments with significant storage and fleet needs at this Center, such as Agriculture and Library Administration, and provide shared resources. »Consolidate Public Works and Conservation and Development staff to maintain productive adjacencies while reducing the quantity and dispersal of facilities. »Conduct a space needs assessment for Animal Services before making major improvements to their existing facility at 4800 Imhoff Pl or expanding to East and West County. »Consider housing or other uses for the 30-40 Muir Rd and 220-255 Glacier Dr campuses. »Develop this program at the 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez campus and convert Arnold Drive, Martinez into housing ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATIONS 107 STAFF Moving from leased facilities 371 STAFF Moving from owned facilities Exhibit 6.22. Staff Moves 328 STAFF Growing in place 806 TOTAL STAFF DCD Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report DEPARTMENT 2020 STAFF 2030 STAFF REMOTE % 2030 SEATS Existing Facilities; Densify; 98,196 SF Public Works 206 220 0%220 Animal Services 71 108 40%72 New Office; Construct; 140K SF (seat sharing) - 164K SF (no sharing) Agriculture 47 0%47 DCD 185 40%124 Public Works 191 0%191 Library 55 60%22 New Storage Facility; Construct; 24K SF Total Parking Stalls Needed: 803 - 899 (County Code) DISPOSED FACILITIES DEPARTMENT OWNERSHIP Phase 1: Storage Facility 2250 Galaxy Ct, Concord Clerk-Recorder Leased 220 Glacier Dr, Martinez Multiple - Storage Owned 255 Glacier Dr, Martinez Public Works Owned All External Storage Multiple Leased Phase 2: Office Facility 40 Muir Rd, Martinez DCD, Public Works Owned 30 Muir Rd, Martinez DCD, Public Works Owned 2380 Bisso Lane, Concord Agriculture Leased 255 Glacier Dr (Main Bldg), Martinez Public Works Owned 255 Glacier Dr (Bldg 500), Martinez Public Works Owned 3685 Mt Diablo Blvd, Lafayette DCD Leased 4061 Port Chicago Hwy, Concord Public Works Leased 777 Arnold Dr, Martinez Library Leased Exhibit 6.23. Waterbird Way Campus Map (27.46 Acres)Exhibit 6.24. Waterbird Way Campus Program Exhibit 6.25. Disposed Facilities (staff relocated to Waterbird Way) Surface Parking Buses (0.5 mi) County Connection Land Currently Leased To Others 2483 Waterbird PWD Imhoff Dr Waterbird WayBenita Way I- 6 8 0 2467 Waterbird FCI=0.473 PWD 2475 Waterbird FCI=0.349 (Bldg A) FCI=0.237 (Bldg B) FCI=0.597 (Bldg C) PWD 2471 Waterbird FCI=0.774 PWDBlum RdPotential Development Area (Currently Ground- Mounted Solar) Potential Development Area 4800 Imhoff Pl FCI=0.238 (Shelter) FCI=0.195 (Barn) Animal Services 4785 Blum FCI=0.365 PWD 137Gensler Recommendations - Service Centers East County Service Center at Technology Way, Brentwood 04 A new Service Center at this location will be more proximate to the growing populations in far East County. This allows the County to update Delta Fair to modern office furniture standards, consolidate the EHSD Call Center and complementary EHSD and Veterans Service functions in Brentwood, and provide outposts for the Clerk-Recorder and Public Defender. Goals Recommendations »Support a “one-stop shop” for East County Public Assistance and Protection services »Reduce the number of facilities in the County’s portfolio »Improve workspaces and the overall employee experience »Leverage the County-owned vacant parcel at Technology Way to build a new Service Center to better serve the dispersed and underserved population of East County. »Consolidate staff from facilities proximate to this location to optimize the County’s real estate portfolio. »Relocate 31 Public Defender staff from 800 Ferry St that currently serve the East County to this Center to minimize Customer travel. »Develop a common customer reception space with multiple service counters, if possible, to help customers easily learn about the variety of services available and to optimize space utilization. »Develop this program at the Delta Fair, Antioch campus and convert Technology Way, Brentwood into housing ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATIONS 26 STAFF Moving from leased facilities 190 STAFF Moving from owned facilities PD EHSD EHSD Exhibit 6.26. Staff Moves 216 TOTAL STAFF »Consider outdoor and indoor public spaces like retail, event spaces, etc., that can help activate the campus, benefit the community, and provide the County alternate sources of revenue. »Provide sufficient drop-in focus and collaboration spaces to accommodate at least 10 employees from other departments not included in this site program to use as needed. This provides an opportunity for County employees to work closer to their homes when needed. »Consider housing or other uses for the 1650 Cavallo Road facility and parcel. Veterans Service Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report DEPARTMENT 2020 STAFF 2030 STAFF REMOTE % 2030 SEATS New Facility; Construct; 56K SF (seat sharing) - 71K SF (no sharing) EHSD 184 40%123 Clerk-Recorder TBD 0%TBD Public Defender 31 0%31 Veterans Service 1 0%1 Total Parking Stalls Needed: 224 - 284 (County Code) DISPOSED FACILITIES DEPARTMENT OWNERSHIP 1650 Cavallo Rd, Antioch EHSD Owned 151 Sand Creek Rd, Brentwood EHSD Leased 3361 Walnut Blvd, Brentwood Veterans Service Leased Exhibit 6.27. Technology Way Campus Map (2.82 Acres) Exhibit 6.29. Disposed Facilities (staff relocated to Technology Way) Technology WayBus Center DrTechnology CtSchool Industrial Park Office Buildings Commercial Store Vacant Land Mini-Warehouse Potential Development Area Exhibit 6.28. Technology Way Campus Program Buses (0.2 mi) Tri Delta Transit 139Gensler Recommendations - Service Centers Expected Outcomes Implementation of the recommendations will reduce the number of facilities by 20% and the total square footage by 7% while accommodating 19% more staff (assuming the implementation of seat sharing). Distribution of ownership will increase by 20%. Benefits Challenges Customer Experience »Improved and equitable customer experience across Central, East, and West with Service Centers as one-stops for multiple County services »Better proximity to East County customers for District Attorney, Public Defender, and Clerk Real Estate Costs »26% reduction in annual lease facility operating costs »7% less SF needed due to denser furniture standards and seat sharing »Easier facility maintenance with reduced facilities and addresses »Significant construction and renovation costs »High-level of consolidation may not be supported by some departments »Phased construction is necessary to minimize service disruptions, which may cause some operational disruptions Critical Factors for Success »Long-term financing model for CAPEX and OPEX »Integrated organizational structure for real estate, capital improvements, and facility management »Change management to assist employees with transitions »Continuous customer and employee feedback and facility improvements »12 owned facilities and 19 leased facilities can be vacated for other uses Collaboration & Sharing »Better collaboration and resource sharing between departments through service centers Employee Experience »Supports employee desire for increased remote work Contra Costa County | Final Report *3.5% annual discount rate applied to future costs. Source: Contra Costa County Public Works Asset Management Inventory, Gensler CAPEX & Occupancy Costs Estimates. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Ownership Base Case Key Stats Portfolio by Ownership Square Feet Facilities CAPEX 1.81M sf 110 $32.7M 2020 Staff Headcount (4,041) Occupancy Costs* $444.3M Master Plan Key Stats Portfolio by Ownership Square Feet CAPEX 1.68-1.83M sf $747.8M 2030 Staff Headcount (4,819) Ownership Owned: 63%Owned: 76%Leased: 24% Leased: 12% City/State/School Owned: 13% City/State/School Owned: 13% 141Gensler Recommendations - 5-Year Implementation OverviewRecommendations - Expected Outcomes County Owned County Leased City/State/School District Owned Current Real Estate Portfolio Map (110 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 CountySonoma County Marin County San Francisco County San Mateo County City/State/School Owned County Owned County Leased Region Boundaries Source: ESRI, Contra Costa CountyNote: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. WEST CENTRAL EAST Contra Costa County | Final Report County Owned ( Service Centers)County Owned Proposed Future County Facilities City/State/School Owned County Owned County Leased Region Boundaries 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 CountySonoma County Marin County San Francisco County San Mateo County !!!! ! ! !!!! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! A D B C A County Leased City/State/School District Owned Vacated/Disposed Recommended Real Estate Portfolio Map (88 Facilities) Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. WEST CENTRAL EAST 143Gensler Recommendations - Expected Outcomes Contra Costa County | Final Report 07 IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE Overview 146 Assumptions and Considerations 148 20-Year Implementation Overview 150 5-Year Implementation Overview 152 East County Service Center at Technology Way, Brentwood 154 Central County Planning and Storage Center at Waterbird Way, Martinez 158 Central County Service Center at 2530 Arnold Dr, Martinez 162 West County Service Center on San Pablo Avenue Corridor 166 Other Central County Facilities 170 Other East County Facilities 174 Other West County Facilities 178 Board of Supervisors Offices 182 Vacated Facilities 186 Occupancy Costs: Status Quo 188 Occupancy Costs: Future State 190 Occupancy Costs: Comparing Status Quo and Future State 194 145Gensler This chapter outlines a high-level implementation timeline and expected occupancy costs and capital expenses (“CAPEX”) for the recommendations introduced in Chapter 6. The planning horizon covers twenty years from 2023 to 2042. Implementation Strategy »Spread out the activation of the Service Centers across 15 years to assist with deploying fundings and PWD resources. Prioritize activation of the East Service Center to address demand in the region. »Minimize temporary swing spaces to reduce short- term facility improvement expenses and disruptions to department operations. Overview »Prioritize making FCA-recommended improvements only to facilities with an FCI score of 0.5+ and general facility improvements to facilities with higher FCI scores. »Align the timing of improvements for most existing facilities to minimize significant quality differences in facilities and inequity issues. »Integrate as many quick- wins (e.g. lease disposals) as possible to reduce costs. Contra Costa County | Final Report Next Steps »Validate department support for participating in the Service Centers. »Validate 2030 headcount assumptions (especially for EHSD), identify 2042 headcounts, and accommodate additional headcount in Service Centers if needed. »Develop detailed space programs for each department. »Conduct detailed needs assessments for Animal Services and Veterans Halls to identify scope and timing of future capital projects. »Conduct due diligence of the parcels identified for the Service Centers and non-County uses to ensure development feasibility. »Evaluate feasibility of purchasing facilities as an alternative to constructing the Service Centers. »Consider developing non- County uses ahead of new construction to help fund new construction. »Identify funding sources for all capital and operating expenses. »Verify feasibility of increasing remote work and offering shared seating. »Develop site master plans for each Service Center location. 147Gensler Implementation Guide - Overview Assumptions and Considerations »Pre-Work: Planning associated with facility improvements, construction, and disposals. This could include detailed facility programs, site master planning, design development, etc. Costs not assumed. • Construct: Construction of new facilities. • Office facilities = $650/SF • Storage = $325/SF • Parking = $30,000/Stall (per County code, 1 Stall per 400 SF is required for professional offices and 1 Stall per 1,000 SF is required for storage) »Tenant Improvements: Variety of improvements including space planning, hard wall construction, paint and carpet, key system improvements, etc. Includes FCA recommended improvements for facilities with FCI score of 0.5+. • General tenant improvements (office and non-office facilities) = $185/SF • Furniture, fixtures, and equipment (office facilities) = $75/SF • FCA recommendations = costs for facilities with FCI score of 0.5+ obtained from “20220315 Asset List CCC from Gensler Rev 20220725.xlsx” sent by Cath Ronan to Gensler on July 25, 2022. »2030 headcounts were provided by Department Leadership in the Department Questionnaire, Interviews, and other engagements. »Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Action Assumptions Headcount Assumptions »Refresh: Includes minimal improvements to facilities that will eventually be disposed in the 20- year plan. • Paint and carpet = $65/SF • Furniture, fixtures, and equipment (to densify specific office facilities) = $75/SF »Dispose: Facility exits and lease closures. Costs not assumed. »Swing: Temporary move into an existing County facility. Costs not assumed. »Move-In: Planning associated with moving staff into a new location. Costs not assumed. »Develop for Non-County Use: Evaluation of feasibility and planning for non-County uses. Costs not assumed. »Quick Wins: Low cost and effort opportunities that can reduce operating expenses. Contra Costa County | Final Report »Comprehensive assessments are needed for Veterans Halls to understand how best to serve multi- generational veterans in cost-effective contemporary settings, while preserving the historic mission of Veterans Halls. »Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Center, while not included in the Master Plan, was identified as a location that can be closed/eliminated. Consider other uses for the location. »Sheriff and Health Services Departments, while not included in the Master Plan, have significant storage needs and should be considered for the new storage facility on Waterbird Way. “Occupancy costs” are defined to include both operating and capital expenses, costs related to replacement reserves, and offsets from intergovernmental funds (e.g., lease reimbursements) negotiated and authorized via countywide cost allocation plans in accordance with OMB A-87. Additional revenue offsets reflect estimates of property values that could potentially be realized from the disposition of certain existing assets under the Master Plan that would no longer be needed to accommodate existing functions. The approach used to analyze the portfolio permits decision makers to prepare for the timing and magnitude of incremental added costs that have been identified to accomplish the principles and goals of the Facilities Master Plan. Key data sources: »Asset Management Inventory (AMI) data from the CCC Public Works Department; »Facility Conditions Assessment (FCA) prepared by Gordian; »Consumer Price Index (CPI) data for the Bay Area; and »CoStar office market data for the county. Other Facilities Not Included in the Master Plan Occupancy Costs 149Gensler Implementation Guide - 5-Year Implementation OverviewImplementation Guide - Assumptions and Considerations 20 YearsExhibit 7.1. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 All Service Centers are recommended to be constructed in the next 15 years to meet service needs and eliminate facilities no longer needed before incurring major renovations. Major improvements for facilities that will be maintained in the portfolio are distributed across the 20 year span. Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. New construction at the Service Centers comprise 64% ($481.7M) of the total capital expenses without shared seating. Shared seating lowers it to 58% ($364.7M)*. *Seat sharing assumptions are discussed in Chapter 6 Recommendations of this report. 20-Year Implementation Overview Construction (64%) Current: $481.7M Tenant Improvements (31%) Current: $230.3M Refresh (5%) Current: $35.8M Total CAPEX: $747.8M Total CAPEX: $630.8M (16% reduction) (WITHOUT SEAT SHARING) (WITH SEAT SHARING AT SERVICE CENTERS) Contra Costa County | Final Report East County Service Center Funding for Central County Planning & Storage Center Phase 1 Funding for Central County Planning & Storage Center Phase 2 Funding for West County Service Center Exhibit 7.2. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Funding for Central County Service Center Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend 151Gensler Implementation Guide - 20-Year Implementation Overview 5 Years 5-Year Implementation Overview »Construct the East County Service Center. »Construct the storage facility at the Central County Planning, Development, and Storage Center. »Initiate FCI-related improvements to facilities with FCI scores of 0.5+. »Begin tenant improvements to existing facilities that will be maintained in the portfolio for 20+ years, since most facilities haven’t undergone recent improvements. »Refresh existing facilities that will be disposed in 6-20 years. Key Actions Exhibit 7.3. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 5 Construction (49%) Current: $62.5MTenant Improvements (28%) Current: $36.3M Refresh (23%) Current: $29.9M Total CAPEX: $128.7M (9% reduction with shared seating) The first five years will be focused on creating the East County Service Center, densifying existing facilities for anticipated headcount growth, and renovating buildings in the worst condition. 17% of the County’s capital expenses will be incurred between Years 1-5. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 7.4. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 5 YEAR YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 Construction $0.0M $0.0M $62.5M $0.0M $0.0M Renovation (TI + Refresh)$0.9M $16.2M $16.9M $17.0M $15.2M CAPEX $0.9M $16.2M $79.3M $17.0M $15.2M Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend 153Gensler Implementation Guide - 5-Year Implementation Overview East County Service Center at Technology Way, Brentwood Begin construction of this Center immediately to address the need for more County services in East County. Implementation Steps Years 1-5 »Initiate pre-work for the location by Year 1 to ensure activation by Year 5. »Consider refreshing and densifying 1650 Cavallo Rd, Antioch (by updating furniture/sharing seats) to accommodate headcount growth until the office facilities at Technology Way are ready for move-in. »Activate the new office and parking facilities and dispose 1650 Cavallo Road, Antioch; 151 Sand Creek Rd, Brentwood; and 3361 Walnut Blvd, Brentwood. Year 6+ »Make tenant improvements to 800 Ferry St, Martinez and plan for 31 Public Defender staff to occupy the office facilities at Technology Way, Brentwood. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report TOTAL SF & COSTS New Office Facilities 71K - 56K SF Parking 284 - 224 stalls Total CAPEX $53.7M - $65.3M Exhibit 7.5. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 Exhibit 7.6. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 By Year YEAR YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7 YR 8 YR 9 YR 10 YR 11 YR 12 YR 13 YR 14 YR 15 YR 16 YR 17 YR 18 YR 19 YR 20 Construction $0.0M $0.0M $54.7M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M Renovation (TI + Refresh)$0.0M $3.4M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $7.2M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M CAPEX $0.0M $3.4M $54.7M $0.0M $0.0M $7.2M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend 155Gensler Implementation Guide - East County Service Center at Technology Way, Brentwood Exhibit 7.7. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 5 Exhibit 7.8. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 6 to Year 10 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 7.9. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 11 to Year 15 Exhibit 7.10. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 16 to Year 20 Pre-Work Tenant ImprovementsRefresh Staff MigrationConstruct Dispose Swing Move In Develop for Non-County Use Legend 157Gensler Implementation Guide - East County Service Center at Technology Way, Brentwood Central County Planning and Storage Center at Waterbird Way, Martinez Begin planning the Waterbird storage facility in Year 1. When built, this will eliminate external storage lease expenses and minimize management expenses of internal storage dispersed across the County. In Year 9, begin planning the new office and parking facilities at Waterbird to ensure activation by Year 12. Implementation Steps Years 1 - 5 »Initiate pre-work for the new storage facility in Year 1 to ensure activation by Year 5. Dispose 2250 Galaxy Ct, Concord; 220 Glacier Dr, Martinez; 255 Glacier Dr (Storage), Martinez; and all external storage. »Initiate FCI improvements to 2471 Waterbird Way, Martinez and 2475 Waterbird Way Bldg C, Martinez by Year 1 to improve their FCI score. »Refresh 40 Muir Rd, Martinez; 30 Muir Rd, Martinez; and 2380 Bisso Lane, Concord by Year 3. These facilities will eventually be disposed once the office facilities at Waterbird Way are activated. »Initiate needs assessments for Animal Services to identify services, staff headcounts, site programs, etc. for future facilities in East and West County. Years 6 + »Refresh 255 Glacier Dr (Main Bldg), Martinez; 255 Glacier Dr (Bldg 500), Martinez; 3685 Mt Diablo Blvd, Lafayette; 4061 Port Chicago Hwy, Concord; and 777 Arnold Dr, Martinez by Year 8. These facilities will eventually be disposed once the office facilities at Waterbird Way are activated. »Initiate pre-work for the new office and parking facilities by Year 9, to ensure activation by Year 12. »Make tenant improvements to 2475 Waterbird Way Bldg A, Martinez; 2475 Waterbird Way Bldg B, Martinez; and 2467 Waterbird Way, Martinez; 4800 Imhoff Pl Martinez by Year 12 to coincide with the activation of the new office. »Activate the new office and parking facilities and dispose 40 Muir Rd, Martinez; 30 Muir Rd, Martinez; 2380 Bisso Lane, Concord; 255 Glacier Dr (Main Bldg), Martinez; 255 Glacier Dr (Bldg 500), Martinez; 3685 Mt Diablo Blvd, Lafayette; 4061 Port Chicago Hwy, Concord; and 777 Arnold Dr, Martinez. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report TOTAL SF & COSTS New Office Facilities 164K - 140K SF New Storage Facility 24K SF Existing Facilities 98K SF Parking 899 - 803 stalls Total CAPEX $161.2M - $179.7M Exhibit 7.11. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 YEAR YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7 YR 8 YR 9 YR 10 YR 11 YR 12 YR 13 YR 14 YR 15 YR 16 YR 17 YR 18 YR 19 YR 20 Construction $0.0M $0.0M $7.8M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $133.6M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M Renovation (TI + Refresh)$0.2M $4.1M $9.0M $0.5M $0.0M $0.0M $4.9M $1.5M $7.3M $1.9M $0.2M $8.1M $0.1M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.1M $0.0M $0.4M $0.0M CAPEX $0.2M $4.1M $16.8M $0.5M $0.0M $0.0M $4.9M $1.5M $7.3M $135.5M $0.2M $8.1M $0.1M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.1M $0.0M $0.4M $0.0M Exhibit 7.12. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 By Year Legend Renovation (Refresh/ Tenant Improvements) Construction Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend 159Gensler Implementation Guide - Central County Planning and Storage Center at Waterbird Way, Martinez Exhibit 7.13. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 5 Exhibit 7.14. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 6 to Year 10 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 7.15. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 11 to Year 15 Exhibit 7.16. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 16 to Year 20 Pre-Work Tenant ImprovementsRefresh Staff MigrationConstruct Dispose Swing Move In Develop for Non-County Use Legend 161Gensler Implementation Guide - Central County Planning and Storage Center at Waterbird Way, Martinez Central County Service Center at 2530 Arnold Dr, Martinez Initiate pre-work for this Service Center by Year 6 to ensure that the DoIT server currently located at 30 Douglas Dr, Martinez can be relocated to the new facility in 2530 Arnold Dr, Martinez before the server substantially degrades. Implementation Steps Years 1 - 5 »Consider temporarily relocating staff from 2600 Stanwell Dr, Concord to 1275 Hall Ave, Richmond or one of the Ellinwood Way, Pleasant Hill facilities to eliminate the lease at 2600 Stanwell Dr, Concord (lease expires in 2023 and no reimbursement available for the lease). »Consider if refreshing and densifying 50 Douglas Dr, Martinez is necessary to accommodate headcount growth. Year 6+ »Initiate pre-work for the new office and parking facilities by Year 6 to ensure activation by Year 10. »Activate the new office and parking facilities and dispose all Douglas Dr, Martinez facilities; 4071 Port Chicago Hwy, Concord; 1470 Civic Court, Concord; 3755 Alhambra, Martinez; 1875 Arnold Dr, Martinez; and 1330 Arnold Dr, Martinez. »Make tenant improvements to the exiting facility at 2350 Arnold Dr, Martinez by Year 11. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report TOTAL SF & COSTS New Office Facilities 253K - 173K SF Existing Facility 115K SF Parking 1,012 - 692 stalls Total CAPEX $163.1M - $224.7M YEAR YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7 YR 8 YR 9 YR 10 YR 11 YR 12 YR 13 YR 14 YR 15 YR 16 YR 17 YR 18 YR 19 YR 20 Construction $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $194.8M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M Renovation (TI + Refresh)$0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $29.9M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M CAPEX $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $194.8M $0.0M $0.0M $29.9M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M Exhibit 7.17. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 Exhibit 7.18 Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 By Year Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend 163Gensler Implementation Guide - Central County Service Center at 2530 Arnold Dr, Martinez Exhibit 7.19. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 5 Exhibit 7.20. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 6 to Year 10 (swing) (swing) Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 7.21. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 11 to Year 15 Exhibit 7.22. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 16 to Year 20 (swing) (swing) Pre-Work Tenant ImprovementsRefresh Staff MigrationConstruct Dispose Swing Move In Develop for Non-County Use Legend 165Gensler Implementation Guide - Central County Service Center at 2530 Arnold Dr, Martinez West County Service Center on San Pablo Avenue Corridor (Location TBD) A location on the San Pablo Avenue corridor proximate to the West County Health Clinic is preferred for this Service Center. Activate the Service Center by Year 15. Implementation Steps Years 1 - 5 »Consider temporarily relocating staff from 1535 Fred Jackson Way, Richmond (lease expires in 2024 and is reimbursed up to 94%) and 2101 Vale Rd, San Pablo (lease expires in 2025 and no reimbursement available for the lease) to 1275 Hall Ave, Richmond to minimize lease costs. »Refresh and densify 1275 Hall Ave, Richmond (by updating furniture/sharing seats) to accommodate staff from 1535 Fred Jackson Way, Richmond; 2101 Vale Rd, San Pablo; and 2600 Stanwell, Concord temporarily and dispose the facilities. »Refresh and densify 1305 MacDonald Ave, Richmond (by updating furniture/sharing seats) to accommodate growing headcount at the facility temporarily. Years 11 - 15 »Initiate pre-work for the new office and parking facilities by Year 11 to ensure activation by Year 15. »Activate the new office and parking facilities and dispose 1275 Hall Ave, Richmond and 1305 MacDonald Ave, Richmond Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report TOTAL SF & COSTS New Office Facilities 85K - 118K SF Parking 340 - 472 stalls Total CAPEX $80.2M - $105.6M YEAR YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7 YR 8 YR 9 YR 10 YR 11 YR 12 YR 13 YR 14 YR 15 YR 16 YR 17 YR 18 YR 19 YR 20 Construction $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $90.9M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M Renovation (TI + Refresh)$0.0M $7.8M $7.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M CAPEX $0.0M $7.8M $7.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $90.9M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M Exhibit 7.23. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 Exhibit 7.24 Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 By Year Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend 167Gensler Implementation Guide - West County Service Center Exhibit 7.25. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 5 Exhibit 7.26. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 6 to Year 10 Extend Lease (short-term) + Extend Lease (short-term) + Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 7.27. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 11 to Year 15 Exhibit 7.28. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 16 to Year 20 Extend Lease (short-term) + Extend Lease (short-term) + Pre-Work Tenant ImprovementsRefresh Staff MigrationConstruct Dispose Swing Move In Develop for Non-County Use Legend 169Gensler Implementation Guide - West County Service Center Other Central County Facilities Maintain most of the facilities not impacted by the Service Centers. Make improvements based on need. Implementation Steps Years 1 - 5 »Consider relocating all staff from 627 Ferry St, Martinez to 650 Pine St, Martinez and disposing the 627 Ferry St facility, because of the degrading quality of the facility. Relocate some staff from 1025 Escobar St, Martinez to 650 Pine St (the County has already identified staff for 650 Pine St in an effort separate from the Master Plan). »Evaluate feasibility of disposing 611 Las Juntas St, Martinez immediately (requested by Probation leadership) and absorbing 4 staff at that facility into other facilities. »Make tenant improvements to Ygnacio Valley Library at 2661 Oak Grove Rd, Walnut Creek. Consider transferring the Library to the City after making improvements. »Make tenant improvements to 900 Ward St, Martinez and identify a new lease in East County proximate to the Pittsburg Superior Court for 20 staff from 900 Ward St, Martinez. Years 6+ »Make tenant improvements to 300 Ellinwood Way, Pleasant Hill; 400 Ellinwood Way, Pleasant Hill; 500 Ellinwood Way, Pleasant Hill; 610 Marina Vista Ave, Martinez; 620 Marina Vista Ave, Martinez; 2020 North Broadway, Walnut Creek; 4785 Blum Rd, Martinez; 555 Escobar St, Martinez; 1025 Escobar St, Martinez; and 625 Court St, Martinez. »Coordinate with the City and State to make improvements to facilities owned by them. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report YEAR YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7 YR 8 YR 9 YR 10 YR 11 YR 12 YR 13 YR 14 YR 15 YR 16 YR 17 YR 18 YR 19 YR 20 Construction $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M Renovation (TI + Refresh)$0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $3.4M $12.8M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $1.7M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $13.7M $14.0M $12.5M $12.5M $12.5M $0.0M $18.0M CAPEX $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $3.4M $12.8M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $1.7M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $13.7M $14.0M $12.5M $12.5M $12.5M $0.0M $18.0M Exhibit 7.30. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 By Year TOTAL SF & COSTS Existing Facilities 389K SF Total CAPEX $101.1M Exhibit 7.29. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend 171Gensler Implementation Guide - Other Central County Facilities Exhibit 7.31. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 5 Exhibit 7.32. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 6 to Year 10 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 7.33. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 11 to Year 15 Exhibit 7.34. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 16 to Year 20 Pre-Work Tenant ImprovementsRefresh Staff MigrationConstruct Dispose Swing Move In Develop for Non-County Use Legend 173Gensler Implementation Guide - Other Central County Facilities Other East County Facilities Implementation Steps Maintain most of the facilities not impacted by the Service Centers. Make improvements based on need. Years 1 - 5 »Initiate FCA recommended improvements to 3105 Willow Pass Rd, Bay Point and both suites at 3017 Walnut Blvd, Brentwood (all three spaces have FCI score of 0.5+) »Identify a new lease proximate to the Pittsburg Superior Court for 20 staff from 900 Ward St, Martinez. Years 6+ »Make tenant improvements to 4545 Delta Fair Blvd, Antioch; 4549 Delta Fair Blvd, Antioch; 3103 Willow Pass Rd, Bay Point; 3020 Second St, Knightsen; and 501 W 18th St, Antioch. »Consider transferring the Antioch library at 501 W 18th St to the City after making improvements. »Coordinate with the City and School Districts to make improvements to facilities owned by them. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report YEAR YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7 YR 8 YR 9 YR 10 YR 11 YR 12 YR 13 YR 14 YR 15 YR 16 YR 17 YR 18 YR 19 YR 20 Construction $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M Renovation (TI + Refresh)$0.1M $0.8M $0.2M $1.6M $0.4M $0.1M $10.0M $13.7M $3.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.7M $0.0M $0.1M $0.0M $0.0M $0.2M $0.0M CAPEX $0.1M $0.8M $0.2M $1.6M $0.4M $0.1M $10.0M $13.7M $3.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.7M $0.0M $0.1M $0.0M $0.0M $0.2M $0.0M Exhibit 7.36. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 By Year TOTAL SF & COSTS New Office Facilities 130K SF Existing Facilities 5.8K SF Total CAPEX $31.0M Exhibit 7.35. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend 175Gensler Implementation Guide - Other East County Facilities Exhibit 7.37. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 5 Exhibit 7.38. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 6 to Year 10 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 7.39. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 11 to Year 15 Exhibit 7.40. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 16 to Year 20 Pre-Work Tenant ImprovementsRefresh Staff MigrationConstruct Dispose Swing Move In Develop for Non-County Use Legend 177Gensler Implementation Guide - Other East County Facilities Other West County Facilities Implementation Steps Maintain most of the facilities not impacted by the Service Centers. Make improvements based on need. Years 1 - 5 »Initiate FCA recommended improvements to Pinole Library at 2935 Pinole Valley Rd, Pinole (FCI score of 0.5+). »Identify a new lease proximate to the Richmond Superior Court for all 30 District Attorney staff from 100 37th St, Richmond (department leadership wants to vacate 100 37th St, Richmond due to safety concerns). »Make tenant improvements to 151 Linus Pauling Drive, Hercules and find other uses for the vacant section of the parcel. »Initiate tenant improvements to the 845 and 846 Brookside Dr, Richmond parcels currently occupied by EHSD and PWD and consider creating a master plan for the parcels. Years 6+ »Make tenant improvements to 3811 Bissell Ave, Richmond; 3095 Richmond Pkwy Richmond; 220 Pacific Ave, Rodeo; 4191 Appian Way, El Sobrante; 61 Arlington Ave, Kensington; and 991 Loring Ave, Crockett. »Coordinate with the City to make improvements to facilities owned by them. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Legend Renovation (Refresh/ Tenant Improvements) Construction YEAR YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7 YR 8 YR 9 YR 10 YR 11 YR 12 YR 13 YR 14 YR 15 YR 16 YR 17 YR 18 YR 19 YR 20 Construction $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M Renovation (TI + Refresh)$0.6M $0.0M $0.7M $11.4M $2.0M $8.2M $0.0M $0.1M $4.4M $0.6M $0.0M $2.0M $0.2M $0.0M $0.3M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $6.9M $0.0M CAPEX $0.6M $0.0M $0.7M $11.4M $2.0M $8.2M $0.0M $0.1M $4.4M $0.6M $0.0M $2.0M $0.2M $0.0M $0.3M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $6.9M $0.0M Exhibit 7.42. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 By Year TOTAL SF & COSTS New Office Facilities 8.6K SF Existing Facilities 123K SF Total CAPEX $37.6M Exhibit 7.41. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend 179Gensler Implementation Guide - 5-Year Implementation Overview Exhibit 7.43. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 5 Exhibit 7.44. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 6 to Year 10 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 7.45. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 11 to Year 15 Exhibit 7.46. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 16 to Year 20 Pre-Work Tenant ImprovementsRefresh Staff MigrationConstruct Dispose Swing Move In Develop for Non-County Use Legend 181Gensler Implementation Guide - Other West County Facilities Board of Supervisors Offices Maintain the offices for Districts 1, 2, 3, and 5 and make necessary tenant improvements. Identify a new facility for the new District 4 supervisor. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report YEAR YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7 YR 8 YR 9 YR 10 YR 11 YR 12 YR 13 YR 14 YR 15 YR 16 YR 17 YR 18 YR 19 YR 20 Construction $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M Renovation (TI + Refresh)$0.0M $0.1M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $2.7M $0.0M CAPEX $0.0M $0.1M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $0.0M $2.7M $0.0M Exhibit 7.48. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 By Year TOTAL SF & COSTS New Office Facilities 2K SF Existing Facilities 10K SF Total CAPEX $2.8M Exhibit 7.47. Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 20 Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend 183Gensler Implementation Guide - Board of Supervisors Offices Exhibit 7.49. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 1 to Year 5 Exhibit 7.50. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 6 to Year 10 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 7.51. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 11 to Year 15 Exhibit 7.52. Key Actions and Capital Expenses Between Year 16 to Year 20 Pre-Work Tenant ImprovementsRefresh Staff MigrationConstruct Dispose Swing Move In Develop for Non-County Use Legend 185Gensler Implementation Guide - Board of Supervisors Offices Vacated Facilities Consider other uses for the vacated facilities and parcels, particularly the owned parcels. There is a $15.4M revenue potential from converting owned parcels to multi-family housing. NO FACILITY ADDRESS VACATED YEAR DEPARTMENTS ACRES POTENTIAL RE-USE REVENUE POTENTIAL @ $1M/ACRE LESS DEMOLITION* 1 30 Muir Rd, Martinez Yr 13 / 2035 PWD, DCD 3.8 AC Multi-Family Housing $2.8M240 Muir Rd, Martinez Yr 13 / 2035 PWD, DCD 3 1650 Cavallo Road, Antioch Yr 5 / 2027 EHSD 2 AC Multi-Family Housing $1.6M 4 220 Glacier Dr, Martinez Yr 4 / 2026 Many departments 5 AC Multi-Family Housing $4.2M5255 Glacier Dr (Main Bldg), Martinez Yr 13 / 2035 PWD 6 255 Glacier Dr Bldg 500, Martinez Yr 13 / 2035 PWD 7 255 Glacier Dr (Storage), Martinez Yr 4 / 2026 PWD 8 10 Douglas Dr, Martinez Yr 11 / 2033 Veterans Service, DA 5.5 AC Multi-Family Housing $3.8M930 Douglas Dr, Martinez Yr 11 / 2033 DoIT 10 40 Douglas Dr, Martinez Yr 11 / 2033 EHSD 11 50 Douglas Dr, Martinez Yr 11 / 2033 Probation , DCSS, Health Services 4.5 AC $3M 12 1305 MacDonald Ave, Richmond Yr 16 / 2038 EHSD N/A Unknown; potentially Affordable Housing Nill (land donation) 13 151 Linus Pauling Drive, Hercules (not vacating the facility - only the vacant land) Yr 5 / 2027 EHSD 2 AC $2M Total Revenue Potential: $17.4M Exhibit 7.53. Revenue Potential for Vacated Owned Parcels *$16/sf assumed for demolition costs. Contra Costa County | Final Report NO FACILITY ADDRESS VACATED YEAR DEPARTMENTS 1 3685 Mt Diablo Blvd, Lafayette Yr 13 / 2035 DCD 2 2600 Stanwell, Concord Yr 3 / 2025 EHSD 3 4071 Port Chicago Hwy, Concord Yr 11 / 2033 EHSD 4 1470 Civic Ct, Concord Yr 11 / 2033 EHSD 5 3755 Alhambra, Martinez Yr 11 / 2033 EHSD 6 1875 Arnold Dr, Martinez Yr 11 / 2033 EHSD 7 777 Arnold Dr, Martinez Yr 13 / 2035 Library 8 1330 Arnold Dr, Martinez Yr 11 / 2033 DA 9 2250 Galaxy Ct, Concord Yr 4 / 2026 Clerk 10 4061 Port Chicago Hwy, Concord Yr 13 / 2035 Public Works 11 1535 Fred Jackson Way, Richmond Yr 3 / 2025 EHSD 12 1275 Hall Ave, Richmond Yr 16 / 2038 EHSD 13 627 Ferry St, Martinez Yr 3 / 2025 DA 14 611 Las Juntas St, Martinez Yr 3 / 2025 DA 15 2380 Bisso Ln, Ste A, Concord Yr 13 / 2035 Agriculture 16 2101 Vale Rd, San Pablo Yr 3 / 2025 Veterans Service 17 3361 Walnut Blvd, Brentwood Yr 5 / 2027 Veterans Service 18 151 Sand Creek Rd, Brentwood Yr 5 / 2027 EHSD 19 2151 Salvio St, Concord Yr 3 / 2025 BOS NO FACILITY ADDRESS VACATED YEAR DEPARTMENTS 1 100 37th St, Richmond Yr 5 / 2027 DA Exhibit 7.54. Vacated Leased Facilities Exhibit 7.55. Vacated City-Owned Facilities Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. 187Gensler Implementation Guide - Vacated Facilities Occupancy Costs: Base Case Base Case occupancy costs simulate the annual costs of leasing and owning County facilities over 20 years. The Base Case assumes a static real estate portfolio, no new construction or acquisitions, and all existing leases continue indefinitely. Present Value Discount Rate Estimated Costs An annual discount rate was applied to future occupancy cost projections to estimate the “present value” of such costs over the 20-year projection period. An annual discount rate of 3.5% was applied. The County maintains a AAA+ credit rating and as of Fall 2022, the annual discount rate assumption may be conservative. About $97 million of lease revenue bonds were sold last year, for example, with an average annual interest rate of about 2%. A higher discount rate assumption was used given the recent rate hikes and likelihood that interest rates will continue to increase from the historically low rates. »Total occupancy costs on a nominal (undiscounted) basis are estimated at $629.5 million over 20 years, representing average annual costs of $31.5 million. »On a “Present Value” basis, total occupancy costs over 20 years are estimated at $444.4 million, representing average annual costs of $22.2 million. »Operating expenses for leased spaces, including the effects of existing lease reimbursements, are estimated to comprise about 16% of future occupancy costs. »Operating expenses and reserves for owned spaces are estimated to comprise approximately 66% of future occupancy costs. »Existing debt service and capital expenditures (to complete select FCA improvements), which are primarily associated with owned facilities, are estimated to comprise an additional 17% of future occupancy costs. Contra Costa County | Final Report Exhibit 7.56. Base Case Annual Occupancy Costs (in Present Value) 189Gensler Implementation Guide - Occupancy Costs: Base Case Occupancy Costs: Master Plan The Master Plan Occupancy Costs reflect annual costs associated with implementing the timing and phasing of recommendations discussed in this report and assuming that no seat sharing program is implemented. Estimated Costs »Under the Master Plan alternative, total occupancy costs on a non-discounted (nominal) basis are estimated at approximately $1.3 billing over 20 years; an increase of $671 million or 107% over the Base Case alternative. »On a “Present Value” basis, total occupancy costs over 20 years are estimated at $898.7 million, representing average annual costs of $44.9 million. Average annual occupancy costs under the Master Plan alternative are approximately $30-per- square-foot in present value terms. »Operating expenses for leased spaces are estimated to comprise about 6% of future occupancy costs. »Operating expenses and reserves for owned spaces are estimated to comprise approximately 37% of future occupancy costs. »Capital expenditures and debt service are estimated to comprise the majority or approximately 56% of future occupancy costs under the Master Plan. »Total annual occupancy costs in present value are estimated at $29.76-per-square- foot and about $9,700 per future employee. »East County facilities comprise the smallest share of future Master Plan occupancy costs. Average annual costs are estimated at $6.8 million on a present value basis, representing an annual cost of about $34.70-per-square-foot or $9,100 per employee. »Central County facilities will continue to account for most (67%) annual occupancy costs under the Master Plan. Average annual costs are estimated at $30.2 million or about $28-per-square-foot and $9,400 per employee. »West County facilities comprise about 18% of future Master Plan occupancy costs. Average annual costs are estimated at $8.0 million on a present value basis, or about $31.60-per-square-foot and $11,800 per employee. Contra Costa County | Final Report $0 $10,000,000 $20,000,000 $30,000,000 $40,000,000 $50,000,000 $60,000,000 $70,000,000 $80,000,000 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 Owned Operating Expense Leased Operating Expense Capital Expenditures + Debt Service $44.9M average annual cost Exhibit 7.57. Annual Master Plan Occupancy Costs (in Present Value) Master Plan Occupancy Costs by Region Present Value 1 Average Annual Occupancy Cost Annual Per-Square-Foot Annual Per Headcount 2 East $6,811,235 $34.72 $9,143 Central $30,155,482 $28.41 $9,356 West $7,970,208 $31.55 $11,790 Total $44,936,925 $29.76 $9,676 1 3.5% annual discount rate applied to future costs. 2 Based on future 2030 headcounts by region. Source: Gruen Gruen + Associates 191Gensler Implementation Guide - Occupancy Costs: Master Plan Occupancy Costs: Comparing the Base Case and Master Plan Present value occupancy costs of the Master Plan alternative are estimated to exceed the Base Case scenario by approximately $22.7 million annually. Estimated Costs »Over the cumulative 20-year projection, the County should expect to incur additional occupancy costs associated with the Master Plan, if fully implemented, of approximately $454 million in present value (or $671 million in non-discounted, nominal dollars). »Average annual costs to occupy the real estate portfolio on a per-square-foot basis would double, increasing from $14.77-per-square-foot to $29.76-per-square-foot. »Facilities and service centers in the Central County are projected to account for approximately 62% of the additional occupancy costs. Facilities and service centers located in East County and West County are estimated to account for 20% and 18% of the additional occupancy costs, respectively. »Approximately 94% of the added annual occupancy costs of the Master Plan (relative to Base Case alternative) are attributable to capital expenditures and debt service required to complete the recommended new construction, renovations, and tenant improvements. »Under the Base Case (status-quo) alternative, the County would incur average annual capital and debt service costs of about $4.5 million annually (in present value dollars). The annual capital and debt service cost associated with implementation of the Master Plan is estimated to be approximately $25.9 million. »Central County facilities, including the Central County Planning and Storage Center and the Central County Service Center are projected to comprise approximately 67% of future occupancy costs. Relative to the Base Case scenario, average annual occupancy costs in the Central County will increase by approximately $14 million (present value) or 87%. »The East County Service Center and other facilities are projected to comprise approximately 15% of future annual occupancy costs. Relative to the Base Case scenario, average annual occupancy costs in the East County will increase by $4.6 million or 204%. »The planned West County Service Center (location to-be-determined) and other facilities are projected to comprise about 18% of future annual occupancy costs. Relative to the Base Case, average annual costs in the West County will increase by $4.1 million or 108%. »All of the Service Center costs assume construction of new facilities. However, the County will monitor market conditions and explore opportunities to purchase existing facilities where applicable, which would significantly lower total occupancy costs. Contra Costa County | Final Report Comparison of Present Value1 Occupancy Costs BASE CASE MASTER PLAN DIFFERENCE 20-Year Total Average Annual 20-Year Total Average Annual Average Annual East County Owned Operating Expense $35,208,871 $1,760,444 $49,860,699 $2,493,035 +$732,591 Leased Operating Expense $5,097,612 $254,881 $6,396,927 $319,846 +$64,966 Capital Exp. & Debt Service $4,544,981 $227,249 $79,967,081 $3,998,354 +$3,771,105 Total Occupancy Cost $44,851,464 $2,242,573 $136,224,707 $6,811,235 +$4,568,662 Annual Per-Square-Foot $14.51 $34.72 Central County Owned Operating Expense $196,180,570 $9,809,029 $222,152,250 $11,107,612 +$1,298,584 Leased Operating Expense $56,604,241 $2,830,212 $33,895,862 $1,694,793 ($1,135,419) Capital Exp. & Debt Service $70,140,488 $3,507,024 $347,061,520 $17,353,076 +$13,846,052 Total Occupancy Cost $322,925,299 $16,146,265 $603,109,632 $30,155,482 +$14,009,217 Annual Per-Square-Foot $14.46 $28.41 West County Owned Operating Expense $52,092,257 $2,604,613 $56,400,598 $2,820,030 +$215,417 Leased Operating Expense $9,164,396 $458,220 $12,038,675 $601,934 +$143,714 Capital Exp. & Debt Service $15,318,919 $765,946 $90,964,892 $4,548,245 +$3,782,299 Total Occupancy Cost $76,575,571 $3,828,779 $159,404,164 $7,970,208 +$4,141,430 Annual Per-Square-Foot $15.57 $31.55 TOTAL Owned Operating Expense $283,481,698 $14,174,085 $328,413,547 $16,420,677 +$2,246,592 Leased Operating Expense $70,866,248 $3,543,312 $52,331,463 $2,616,573 ($926,739) Capital Exp. & Debt Service $90,004,388 $4,500,219 $517,993,493 $25,899,675 +$21,399,456 Total Occupancy Cost $444,352,334 $22,217,617 $898,738,504 $44,936,925 +$22,719,308 Annual Per-Square-Foot $14.64 $29.76 1 3.5% annual discount rate applied to future costs. Source: Gruen Gruen + Associates Exhibit 7.58. Comparision of Base Case and Master Plan Occupancy Costs (in Present Value) 193Gensler Implementation Guide - Occupancy Costs: Comparing the Base Case and Master Plan COUNTY FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Summary | September 20, 2022 Recap of Key Decisions Regional Service Centers Facility Recommendations Implementation Plan Next Steps Considerations Agenda 1 2 3 4 5 6 Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 2 RECAP OF KEY DECISIONS Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 3 Options: 20-Year Vision OPTION 3 MINIMAL CHANGE Grow in place with limited disruptions OPTION 1 MAJOR CHANGE Consolidate into regional service centers OPTION 2 MODERATE CHANGE Densify owned parcels and strengthen East presence SELECTED GUIDING PRINCIPLES ACHIEVED GUIDING PRINCIPLES ACHIEVED GUIDING PRINCIPLES ACHIEVED CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE REAL ESTATE COSTS REAL ESTATE COSTS REAL ESTATE COSTS COLLAB & SHARING COLLAB & SHARING COLLAB & SHARING EMPLOYEE EXPERIENCE EMPLOYEE EXPERIENCE EMPLOYEE EXPERIENCE TECH ADOPTION TECH ADOPTION TECH ADOPTION »Colocate complementary departments and services into regional service centers in Central, West, and East County »Increase presence in East County »Reduce addresses* by consolidating into owned facilities and eliminating leases »Densify offices by updating furniture standards and introducing seat sharing »Make FCA** identified improvements »Increase remote work from 50% to 60% for departments that can support it »Colocate some complementary departments and services into regional service centers in Central County »Increase presence in East County »Reduce addresses* by consolidating into owned facilities and eliminating leases »Densify offices by updating furniture standards and introducing seat sharing »Make FCA** identified improvements »Increase remote work from 50% to 60% for departments that can support it »Densify offices by updating furniture standards »Make FCA** identified improvements KEY ACTIONS KEY ACTIONS KEY ACTIONS *Refers to distinct addresses that don’t share common spaces (e.g. parking). 4545 and 4549 Delta Fair is considered a common address and campus **FCA = 2021-2022 Facility Condition Assessment performed by Gordian. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 4 Regional Service Centers Regional service centers are one-stop campuses where multiple departments can be colocated for increased collaboration and resource sharing, and for the public to access different County services in one convenient location. Common features of regional service centers: »Common entry / front door to County services »Space for community activities »Access to public transportation »Common support spaces for staff (e.g. amenities, mail rooms) »Private suites for departments with confidentiality needs »Drop-in spaces for other departments EXAMPLES South County Service Center, Santa Cruz County 4 Depts: Career Center, Child Support Services, Agricultural Commissioner’s office, Adult and Juvenile Probation. 6 Depts: Social Services Agency, Rehabilitation, Library, Employment Development, Center for Education and Careers, Adult and Career Education 7 Depts: Public Social Services, Children and Family Services, Child Support Services, Probation, Public Health, Health Services, and Mental Health 4 Depts: Public Social Services, Mental Health, Child Support Services, Children & Family Services Eden Area Multi-Service Center, Alameda County Zev Yaroslavsky Family Support Center, LA County Administration Building, LA County 1 1 2 3 4 3 2 4 Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 5 West County Service Center Location TBD (proximate to the West County Health Clinic in San Pablo) Central County Service Center at 2530 Arnold Drive, Martinez Planning, Development and Storage Center at Waterbird Way, Martinez East County Service Center at Technology Way, Brentwood !!!!! !!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !!! !!!! !!! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 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 Region Boundaries CCC Facilities Source: ESRI, Contra Costa County A A B C D BC D Regional Service Center Locations WEST CENTRAL EAST Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 6 Central County Service Center Planning, Development, and Storage Center Build new facilities & renovate existing facilities at 2530 Arnold Drive, Martinez Build new facilities & renovate existing facilities at Waterbird Way, Martinez 1,087 Staff (2030 Headcount projections) 806 Staff (2030 Headcount projections) 288K GSF (368K GSF without seat sharing) 262K GSF (286K GSF without seat sharing) 9 Depts Assessor, Risk Management + CAO, DA, DCSS, DoIT, EHSD, Probation, Veterans Services 5 Depts Animal Services +Public Works, Agriculture, DCD, Library East County Service Center West County Service Center Build new facilities at Technology Way, Brentwood Build or acquire new facilities at a new location proximate to the West County Health Clinic (13601 San Pablo Avenue, San Pablo) 216 Staff (2030 Headcount projections) 376 Staff (2030 Headcount projections) 56K GSF (71K GSF without seat sharing) 85K GSF (118K GSF without seat sharing) 4 Depts EHSD, PD, Clerk, Veterans Services 3 Depts EHSD, Clerk, Veterans Services Regional Service Center Locations Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 7 RECOMMENDATIONS & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 8 Key Facility Recommendations Improve Customer and Employee Spaces Consolidate Portfolio and Optimize Facility Management Collocate Complementary Departments at Regional Service Centers 01 02 03 04 »Create Regional Service Centers in West, Central, and East County. »Position facilities as vibrant community hubs and recognizable “front doors” to County services. »Leverage footprints to introduce more public transit options. »Introduce a mix of department-specific suites and shared spaces. »Include drop-in spaces for other departments. »Expand Animal Service outside Martinez. »Develop a Facility Condition Assessment and improvement strategy and process. »Develop accessible and professional environments. »Ensure that all campuses with more than one facility have clear way-finding and paths of travel. »Increase remote work for functions that can support it. »Develop an intentional remote program managed by a dedicated team. »Introduce seat sharing. »Increase collaboration spaces. »Reduce the number of leased facilities. »Balance consolidation and distribution. »Implement a Central Real Estate Inventory and Facility Management Tool. »Establish a new Capital Improvement Planning Process. Support Flexible Work Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 9 »Utilize modern, efficient, and consistent space standards, including consistently- sized work and collaborative spaces. »Create new County-wide office design guidelines. »Adjust space layouts to accommodate activity-based work. »Collocate support spaces and provide common areas for employee socialization. »Adopt standardized access control to all County buildings. »Harden boundaries between public-facing and staff-only areas. »Provide secure and well-lit parking. »Add “eyes on the street.” »Explore potential for housing development across underutilized County-owned sites. »Engage with the development community. »Audit the effectiveness of current virtual services and make strategic improvements. »Conduct a County-wide service needs assessment and identify additional virtual service opportunities. »Strengthen technology to support virtual service delivery and remote work. »Create a County-wide virtual service delivery platform. »Introduce mobile services for new and growing geographies as well as for large employers of government customers. Key Facility Recommendations Strengthen Safety and SecurityExpand Virtual and Mobile Services for Customers Introduce Modern and Efficient Space Standards Support Housing Development 05 06 07 08 Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 10 Implementation Plan Goals »Spread out the activation of the Regional Service Centers across 15 years to assist with deploying funds and PWD resources. »Prioritize activation of the East County Service Center to address demand in the region. »Minimize temporary swing spaces to reduce short-term facility improvement expenses and disruptions to department operations. »Initiate FCA-recommended improvements only to facilities with an FCI score of 0.5+ during the first five years. »Prioritize general facility improvements to facilities with higher FCI scores. »Align the timing of improvements for most existing facilities to minimize significant quality differences in facilities and inequity issues. »Integrate as many quick-wins (e.g. lease disposals) as possible to reduce costs. 5 Year Facility Condition Index Scale Excellent Good Fair Poor Deficient Near-Term Requirement & Systems Renewal Costs Asset Current Replacement Value Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 11 5-Year Implementation Overview Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend »Construct the East County Service Center. »Construct the storage facility at the Central County Planning, Development, and Storage Center. »Initiate FCI-related improvements to facilities with FCI scores of 0.5+. »Begin tenant improvements to existing facilities that will be maintained in the portfolio for 20+ years, since most facilities haven’t undergone recent improvements. »Refresh existing facilities that will be disposed in 6-20 years. 5 Years Construction (49%) Current: $62.5M Tenant Improvements (28%) Current: $36.3M Refresh (23%) Current: $29.9M Total CAPEX: $128.7M (9% reduction with shared seating) Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 12 20 Years 20-Year Implementation Plan Overview East County Service Center Funding for Central County Planning & Storage Center Phase 1 Funding for Central County Planning & Storage Center Phase 2 Funding for West County Service Center Funding for Central County Service Center Construct Tenant Improvements Refresh Legend Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. New construction at the Service Centers comprise 64% ($481.7M) of the total capital expenses without shared seating. Implementing shared seating, which would lower the square footage requirement, reduces the percentage to 58% ($364.7M).Construction (64%) Current: $481.7M Tenant Improvements (31%) Current: $230.3M Refresh (5%) Current: $35.8M Total CAPEX: $747.8M (16% reduction with shared seating) Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 13 Next Steps for the County Department Related »Gauge department support for participating in the Service Centers. »Validate 2030 headcount assumptions (especially for EHSD) and identify 2043 headcounts. »Develop detailed space programs for each department. »Conduct detailed needs assessments for Animal Services and Veterans Halls to identify scope and timing of capital projects. Facility Related »Conduct due diligence of the parcels identified for the Service Centers and non-County uses to ensure development feasibility. »Evaluate feasibility of purchasing facilities as an alternative to constructing the Service Centers. »Develop site master plans for each Service Center location. »Consider developing non-County uses ahead of new construction to help fund new construction. »Identify funding sources for all capital and operating expenses. »Verify feasibility of increasing remote work and offering seat sharing for recommended departments. Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 14 Continually poll and gauge customer and employee feedback. Establish a robust Change Management program to assist employees, if significant changes, such as increased remote work and seat sharing are implemented. Establish a Capital Improvement Planning Process that prioritizes projects based on quantitative/ qualitative cost/benefit analyses and funding sources. The directors of Public Works and Finance should be key players in the process with close links to the CAO and Information Technology departments. 01 02 03 04 Consider collaborating with other proximate non-County employers to identify critical mass of ridership for a public bus stop or private shuttles. Paid parking could be an effective strategy to help fund public transit. Considerations Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 15 Assumptions »Construct: Construction of new facilities. • Office facilities = $650/SF • Storage = $325/SF • Parking = $30,000/Stall (per County code, 1 Stall per 400 SF is required for professional offices and 1 Stall per 1,000 SF is required for storage) »Tenant Improvements: Variety of improvements including space planning, hard wall construction, paint and carpet, key system improvements, etc. Includes FCA recommended improvements for facilities with FCI score of 0.5+. • General tenant improvements (office and non-office facilities) = $185/SF • Furniture, fixtures, and equipment (office facilities) = $75/SF • FCA recommendations = costs for facilities with FCI score of 0.5+ obtained from “20220315 Asset List CCC from Gensler Rev 20220725.xlsx” sent by Cath Ronan to Gensler on July 25, 2022. »Refresh: Includes minimal improvements to facilities that will eventually be disposed in the 20-year plan. • Paint and carpet = $65/SF • Furniture, fixtures, and equipment (to densify specific office facilities) = $75/SF Note: Health Services, Fire, Sheriff, Detention Facilities, and EHSD Head Start Facilities were excluded. Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 16 Discussion Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 17 1       From: Lisa Kirk >   Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2022 8:33 AM  To: Clerk of the Board <ClerkOfTheBoard@cob.cccounty.us>  Subject: Public comments for item D6 animal service assessment.    The  report calls for an assessment in expanding services to hard to reach areas of West Contra Costa County in East  Contra Costa County.  I don't think that East Contra Costa County should be considered hard to reach.The fact is there are no Animals Services  in this area. The density of population is increasing along with the animal population.   Contra Costa Animal Services has chosen a radical switch in Sheltering by turning away animals from the shelter and  limiting their capacity.   Why you would extended the existing facilities or consider facilities in West County and East County.   The West County shelter was turn  over to a spay and neuter provider that does not provide any mandated services for  Sheltering.  The report states an assessment for partnerships in those existing areas. I don't see this recommendation in report for  other services.  The Pinole shelter was turned over to a non‐profit for spay and neuters only.  This was it clinic that was already providing service so there is no additional services to the public.  Building and expanding additional Spay and Neuter Clinic should be the focus of the assessment.    Contra Costa County needs adequate low cost no cost high volume spay and neuter clinics in order to deal with this  horrific animal overpopulation that has been created, by numerous factors, including the fact that your shelter is now  turning away animals.  When Sacramento County built their new animal shelter they also built a free‐standing building next to them that  provides spays and neuters through a non profit.    In furture assessments can it be reviewed that these areas need spay and neuter facilities not an additional shelters.  Accomplished by the county building additional facilities or providing mobile units to accomplish this.  There is a simple solution here the less unwanted animals the less need for Sheltering.  2 Thank you Lisa Kirk Contra Costa SPCA        Considered in the plan for additional spay and neuter facilities either to be built or provided in a mobile setting  RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. ELECT a Supervisor to be Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors for calendar year 2023 or until the selection of a successor, whichever occurs later. 2. ELECT a Supervisor to be Vice Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors for calendar year 2023 or until the selection of a successor, whichever occurs later. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: At the first meeting of each calendar year, the Board of Supervisors reorganizes, updates its rules of procedure, establishes the list of standing and ad hoc committees and appoints Board members to committees, and discusses prior year accomplishments and new year goals and challenges. Preparation for the annual reorganization meeting requires many weeks of staff effort, under the direction of the Board Chair. The Board of Supervisors votes to select its officers following a nomination process. Although not a requirement, the Board has rotated the offices of Chair and Vice Chair among the five members, i.e., each member would serve as Chair at APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS Contact: Jami Morritt 925-655-2005 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: , Deputy cc: D.7 To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Nomination of 2023 Officers of the Board of Supervisors BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) least once during his/her term of office. The Chair serves as presiding officer of the Board; rules on questions of procedure; nominates for Board approval representatives to Board committees whose appointment is not otherwise provided for; signs resolutions, ordinances, contracts, leases and other official documents approved by the Board; preserves order and decorum; and decides all questions of order. The Chair may consult with County Counsel in making such rulings. Decisions of the Chair may be overruled by a majority vote of the Board of Supervisors. The Vice Chair has and may exercise all powers and duties of the Chair at the meetings at which the Chair is absent. If neither the Chair nor the Vice Chair is present at a Board meeting, the Board members present selects one of their members to act as the Chair Pro Tempore. The Chair Pro Tempore shall have and exercise all the powers and duties of the Chair for that particular meeting only. Because the reorganization requires substantial thought and planning, early selection of new year officers permits the incoming Board Chair to take an active role in planning for the annual reorganization. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Planning and administration of the annual board reorganization may take longer to implement if the 2023 board officers are not decided in the fall of 2022. CLERK'S ADDENDUM Speakers: No name given. ELECTED Supervisor John Gioia as Chair for 2023; and ELECTED Supervisor Federal D. Glover to continue to serve as Vice-Chair. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a Consulting Services Agreement (contract) with Fehr & Peers, in an amount not to exceed $250,000, for the period September 20, 2022, through September 19, 2025, to provide on-call transportation engineering services, Countywide. (Project Nos. Various) (All Districts) FISCAL IMPACT: Work performed under this on-call contract will be funded by developer fees, local road funds for road projects, and various other funds. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department is involved in various projects in the County that require transportation engineering services for road projects. After a solicitation process, Fehr & Peers was selected as one of five firms to provide transportation engineering services on an “on-call” basis. The consultant will augment Public Works staff on an as-needed basis. They will be used as an extension to Public Works staff during busy times when extra help is needed or when in-house expertise is not available. This on-call contract will be in effect for thirty-six months. Government Code Section 31000 and 4525 authorizes the County to contract for services, including the type of transportation engineering services that Fehr & Peers provides. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Jeff Valeros, 925-313-2031 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 1 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Consulting Services Agreement with Fehr & Peers, for On-Call Transportation Engineering Services. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without approval from the Board of Supervisors, there is possible delay in completing projects requiring transportation engineering services. Executing this contract will facilitate the process of design and planning for various Public Works projects requiring transportation engineering expertise. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a Consulting Services Agreement (contract) with T J K M d/b/a TJKM Transportation Consultants, in an amount not to exceed $250,000, for the period September 20, 2022, through September 19, 2025, to provide on-call transportation engineering services, Countywide. (Project Nos. Various) (All Districts) FISCAL IMPACT: Work performed under this on-call contract will be funded by developer fees, local road funds for road projects, and various other funds. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department is involved in various projects in the County that require transportation engineering services for road projects. After a solicitation process, T J K M d/b/a TJKM Transportation Consultants was selected as one of five firms to provide transportation engineering services on an “on-call” basis. The consultant will augment Public Works staff on an as-needed basis. They will be used APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Jeff Valeros, 925-313-2031 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 2 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Consulting Services Agreement with T J K M d/b/a TJKM Transportation Consultants, for On-Call Transportation Engineering Services. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) as an extension to Public Works staff during busy times when extra help is needed or when in-house expertise is not available. This on-call contract will be in effect for thirty-six months. Government Code Section 31000 and 4525 authorizes the County to contract for services, including the type of transportation engineering services that TJKM d/b/a TJKM Transportation Consultants provides. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without approval from the Board of Supervisors, there is possible delay in completing projects requiring transportation engineering services. Executing this contract will facilitate the process of design and planning for various Public Works projects requiring transportation engineering expertise. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a Consulting Services Agreement (contract) with Wood Rodgers, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $250,000, for the period September 20, 2022, through September 19, 2025, to provide on-call transportation engineering services, Countywide. (Project Nos. Various) (All Districts) FISCAL IMPACT: Work performed under this on-call contract will be funded by developer fees, local road funds for road projects, and various other funds. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department is involved in various projects in the County that require transportation engineering services for road projects. After a solicitation process, Wood Rodgers, Inc., was selected as one of five firms to provide transportation engineering services on an “on-call” basis. The consultant will augment Public Works staff on an as-needed basis. They will be used as an extension to Public Works staff during busy times when extra help is needed or when in-house expertise is not available. This on-call contract will be in effect for thirty-six months. Government Code Section 31000 and 4525 authorizes the County to contract for services, including the type of transportation engineering services that Wood Rodgers, Inc., provides. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Jeff Valeros, 925-313-2031 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 3 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Consulting Services Agreement with Wood Rodgers, Inc., for On-Call Transportation Engineering Services. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without approval from the Board of Supervisors, there is possible delay in completing projects requiring transportation engineering services. Executing this contract will facilitate the process of design and planning for various Public Works projects requiring transportation engineering expertise. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a Consulting Services Agreement (contract) with Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. d/b/a W-Trans, in an amount not to exceed $250,000, for the period September 20, 2022, through September 19, 2025, to provide on-call transportation engineering services, Countywide. (Project Nos. Various) (All Districts) FISCAL IMPACT: Work performed under this on-call contract will be funded by developer fees, local road funds for road projects, and various other funds. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department is involved in various projects in the County that require transportation engineering services for road projects. After a solicitation process, Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. d/b/a W-Trans was selected as one of five firms to provide transportation engineering services on an “on-call” basis. The consultant will augment Public Works staff on an as-needed basis. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Jeff Valeros, 925-313-2031 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 4 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Consulting Services Agreement with Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. d/b/a W-Trans, for On-Call Transportation Engineering Services. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) They will be used as an extension to Public Works staff during busy times when extra help is needed or when in-house expertise is not available. This on-call contract will be in effect for thirty-six months. Government Code Section 31000 and 4525 authorizes the County to contract for services, including the type of transportation engineering services that Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. d/b/a W-Trans provides. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without approval from the Board of Supervisors, there is possible delay in completing projects requiring transportation engineering services. Executing this contract will facilitate the process of design and planning for various Public Works projects requiring transportation engineering expertise. RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/310 accepting for recording purposes only an Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes for minor subdivision MS14-00001, for a project being developed by Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated July 17, 1991 (Survivors Trust), as recommended by the Public Works Director, Walnut Creek area. (District IV) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes is required per Condition of Approval No. 27. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes will not be recorded, and the condition of approval will not be satisfied. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Larry Gossett (925) 313-2016 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Joshua Laranang- Engineering Services, Renee Hutchins - Records, Karen Piona- Records, Randolf Sanders- Design & Construction, Chris Lau - Maintenance, Ruben Hernandez - DCD, Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated 07/17/91 C. 5 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Accepting for recording purposes only an Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes for minor subdivision MS14-00001, Walnut Creek area. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2022/310 Offer of Dedication-Road Purposes MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Resoluton No. 2022/310 Recorded at the request of:Clerk of the Board Return To:Public Works Dept- Simone Saleh THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 09/20/2022 by the following vote: AYE:John Gioia, District I SupervisorCandace Andersen, District II SupervisorKaren Mitchoff, District IV SupervisorFederal D. Glover, District V Supervisor NO: ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2022/310 IN THE MATTER OF accepting for recording purposes only an Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes for minor subdivision MS14-00001, for a project being developed by Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated July 17, 1991 (Survivors Trust), as recommended by the Public Works Director, Walnut Creek area. (District IV) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following instrument is hereby ACCEPTED: INSTRUMENT: Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes REFERENCE: APN 180-210-041 GRANTOR: Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated July 17, 1991 (Survivors Trust) AREA: Walnut Creek DISTRICT: IV Contact: Larry Gossett (925) 313-2016 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Joshua Laranang- Engineering Services, Renee Hutchins - Records, Karen Piona- Records, Randolf Sanders- Design & Construction, Chris Lau - Maintenance, Ruben Hernandez - DCD, Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated 07/17/91 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/312 approving the Parcel Map for minor subdivision MS14-00001, for a project being developed by Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated July 17, 1991 (Survivors Trust), as recommended by the Public Works Director, Walnut Creek area. (District IV) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department has reviewed the conditions of approval for minor subdivision MS14-00001 and has determined that all conditions of approval for Parcel Map approval have been satisfied. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Map will not be approved and recorded. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Larry Gossett (925) 313-2016 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Joshua Laranang- Engineering Services, Renee Hutchins - Records, Karen Piona- Records, Randolf Sanders- Design & Construction, Chris Hallford -Mapping , Michael Mann- Finance, Chris Lau - Maintenance, Ruben Hernandez - DCD, Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated 07/17/91, North American Title Insurance Company C. 6 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve the Parcel Map for minor subdivision MS14-00001, Walnut Creek area. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2022/312 Parcel Map Tax Letter MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Resolution No. 2022/312 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 09/20/2022 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2022/312 IN THE MATTER OF approving the Parcel Map for minor subdivision MS14-00001, for a project being developed by Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated July 17, 1991 (Survivors Trust), as recommended by the Public Works Director, Walnut Creek area. (District IV) WHERE AS, the following documents were presented for board approval this date: The Parcel Map of minor subdivision MS14-00001, property located in the Walnut Creek area, Supervisorial District IV, said map having been certified by the proper officials. Said document was accompanied by: 1. Letter from the County Tax Collector stating that there are no unpaid County taxes heretofore levied on the property included in said map and that the 2021-2022 tax lien has been paid in full and the 2022-2023 tax lien, which became a lien on the first day of January 2022, is estimated to be $3,860.00. 2. Security to guarantee the payment of taxes, as required by Title 9 of the County Ordinance Code, in the form of a cash deposit, (Auditor’s Deposit No. DP854139, dated August 11, 2022) made by Donald Sage Mackay in the amount: $3,860.00, guaranteeing the payment of the estimated tax. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That said subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is DETERMINED to be consistent with the County's general and specific plans. 2. That said Parcel map is APPROVED and this Board does hereby accept subject to installation and acceptance of improvements on behalf of the public any of the streets, paths, or easements shown thereon as dedicated to public use. Contact: Larry Gossett (925) 313-2016 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Joshua Laranang- Engineering Services, Renee Hutchins - Records, Karen Piona- Records, Randolf Sanders- Design & Construction, Chris Hallford -Mapping , Michael Mann- Finance, Chris Lau - Maintenance, Ruben Hernandez - DCD, Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated 07/17/91, North American Title Insurance Company RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/313 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute the Deferred Improvement Agreement for minor subdivision MS14-00001, for a project being developed by Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated July 17, 1991 (Survivors Trust), Walnut Creek area. (District IV) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: This Deferred Improvement Agreement is required by Condition of Approval No. 22 of minor subdivision MS14-00001. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Deferred Improvement Agreement will not be approved and executed. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Larry Gossett (925) 313-2016 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Joshua Laranang- Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Design & Construction, Renee Hutchins - Records, Karen Piona- Records, Chris Lau - Maintenance, Michael Mann- Finance, Ruben Hernandez - DCD, Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated 07/17/91 C. 7 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve Deferred Improvement Agreement along Scots Lane for minor subdivision MS14-00001, Walnut Creek area. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2022/313 Deferred Improvement Agreement MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Resolution No. 2022/313 Recorded at the request of:Clerk of the Board Return To:Public Works Dept- Simone Saleh THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 09/20/2022 by the following vote: AYE:John Gioia, District I SupervisorCandace Andersen, District II SupervisorKaren Mitchoff, District IV SupervisorFederal D. Glover, District V Supervisor NO: ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2022/313 IN THE MATTER OF approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute the Deferred Improvement Agreement for minor subdivision MS14-00001, for a project being developed by Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated July 17, 1991 (Survivors Trust), Walnut Creek area. (District IV) WHERE AS, the Public Works Director has recommended that he be authorized to execute the Deferred Improvement Agreement with Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated July 17, 1991 (Survivors Trust), as required by the Conditions of Approval for minor subdivision MS14-00001. This agreement would permit the deferment of construction of permanent improvements along Scots Lane, which is located in the Walnut Creek area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the recommendation of the Public Works Director is APPROVED. Contact: Larry Gossett (925) 313-2016 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Joshua Laranang- Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Design & Construction, Renee Hutchins - Records, Karen Piona- Records, Chris Lau - Maintenance, Michael Mann- Finance, Ruben Hernandez - DCD, Donald S. Mackay, Successor Trustee of the Mackay Trust Agreement dated 07/17/91 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/318 accepting completion of the warranty period for the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) and release of cash deposit for faithful performance for park acceptance PA14-00042 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), for a project developed by Toll Brothers, Inc., as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II) FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Developer Fees. BACKGROUND: The landscape improvements have met the guaranteed performance standards for the warranty period following completion and acceptance of the improvements. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The developer will not receive a refund of the cash deposit, the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) and performance/maintenance surety bond will not be exonerated, and the billing account will not be liquidated and closed. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Larry Gossett (925) 313-2016 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Ronald Lai, Engineering Services, Chris Hallford -Mapping , Michael Mann- Finance, Randolf Sanders- Design & Construction, Chris Low - City of San Ramon, Ruben Hernandez - DCD, Toll Brothers, Inc., Western Surety Company C. 8 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Accepting completion of warranty period for park acceptance PA14-00042, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2022/318 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Resolution No. 2022/318 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 09/20/2022 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2022/318 IN THE MATTER OF accepting completion of the warranty period for a Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) and release of cash deposit for faithful performance for park acceptance PA14-00042 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), for a project developed by Toll Brothers, Inc., as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II) WHEREAS, on September 20, 2022, this Board resolved that the improvements in park acceptance PA14-00042 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971) were completed as provided in the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) with Toll Brothers, Inc., and now on the recommendation of the Public Works Director; The Board hereby FINDS that the improvements have satisfactorily met the guaranteed performance standards for the period following completion and acceptance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Public Works Director is AUTHORIZED to: REFUND the $7,000.00 cash deposit (Auditor’s Deposit Permit No. 695177, dated October 6, 2015) plus interest to Toll Brothers, Inc., in accordance with Government Code Section 53079, if appropriate, Ordinance Code Section 94-4.406, and the subdivision agreement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that on April 10, 2018, under Resolution No. 2018-039, the San Ramon City Council accepted the landscape improvements for maintenance in accordance with the Dougherty Valley Memorandum of Understanding. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the warranty period has been completed and the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) and surety bond, Bond No. 58727561, dated August 11, 2015, issued by Western Surety Company, are EXONERATED. Contact: Larry Gossett (925) 313-2016 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Ronald Lai, Engineering Services, Chris Hallford -Mapping , Michael Mann- Finance, Randolf Sanders- Design & Construction, Chris Low - City of San Ramon, Ruben Hernandez - DCD, Toll Brothers, Inc., Western Surety Company RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/319 accepting completion of the Agreement for Improvement Warranty and release of cash deposit for faithful performance, for park acceptance PA15-00044 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), for a project developed by Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II) FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Developer Fees. BACKGROUND: The landscape improvements have met the guaranteed performance standards for the warranty period following completion and acceptance of the improvements. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The developer will not receive a refund of the cash deposit, the Agreement for Improvement Warranty and performance/maintenance surety bond will not be exonerated, and the billing account will not be liquidated and closed. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Larry Gossett (925) 313-2016 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Ronald Lai, Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Design & Construction, Chris Hallford -Mapping , Michael Mann- Finance, Chris Low - City of San Ramon, Ruben Hernandez - DCD, Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corp., Western Surety Company C. 9 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Accepting completion of the Agreement for Improvement Warranty for park acceptance PA15-00044, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2022/319 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Resolution No. 2022/319 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 09/20/2022 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2022/319 IN THE MATTER OF accepting completion of the Agreement for Improvement Warranty and release of cash deposit for faithful performance, for park acceptance PA15-00044 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), for a project developed by Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II) WHEREAS, on September 20, 2022, this Board resolved that the improvements in park acceptance PA15-00044 (cross-reference SD05-08971) were completed as provided in the Agreement for Improvement Warranty with Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, and now on the recommendation of the Public Works Director; The Board hereby FINDS that the improvements have satisfactorily met the guaranteed performance standards for the period following completion and acceptance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Public Works Director is AUTHORIZED to: REFUND the $3,840.00 cash deposit (Auditor’s Deposit Permit No.757523, dated March 5, 2018) plus interest to Toll Brothers, Inc., in accordance with Government Code Section 53079, if appropriate, Ordinance Code Section 94-4.406, and the subdivision agreement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that on April 10, 2018, under Resolution No. 2018-039, the San Ramon City Council accepted the landscape improvements for maintenance in accordance with the Dougherty Valley Memorandum of Understanding. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the warranty period has been completed and the Agreement for Improvement Warranty and surety bond, Bond No. 30034551, dated February 28, 2018, issued by Western Surety Company, are EXONERATED. Contact: Larry Gossett (925) 313-2016 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Ronald Lai, Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Design & Construction, Chris Hallford -Mapping , Michael Mann- Finance, Chris Low - City of San Ramon, Ruben Hernandez - DCD, Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corp., Western Surety Company RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to execute a contract amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with KSA Engineers, Inc. to add an additional subconsultant to update the Airport Division’s disadvantaged business enterprise program. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no negative impact on the General Fund. There is no change to the contract amount with all contract costs being paid by the Airport Enterprise Fund. BACKGROUND: To satisfy FAA requirements, the Airport is required to complete an evaluation of its existing disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) program and, if needed to comply with current FAA standards, update the program. In addition, the Airport must establish a new three-year average DBE goal. Following a solicitation sent to all the Airport’s on-call consultants, one consultant, KSA Engineers, Inc., agreed to perform the required review and update APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Beth Lee, 925-681-4200 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 10 To:Board of Supervisors From:Greg Baer, Director of Airports Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE AMENDMENT No. 1 TO CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH KSA ENGINEERS BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) through a subconsultant. This contract amendment is necessary in order to add the subconsultant, Kutchins & Groh, Inc., to the existing on-call contract to enable the subconsultant to be paid for performing the work. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the contract amendment is not approved, KSA Engineers will not be able to complete the FAA-required work. CLERK'S ADDENDUM Speaker: No name given. ATTACHMENTS KSA Amendment No 1 RECOMMENDATION(S): DENY the claims filed by T-Mobile West LLC, Sprint Telephony PCS, LP, Sprint Communications Company, LP, SFPP, L.P., and Lumen Technologies (formerly Level 3 Communications, LLC) in the total amount of $696,332.28, plus interest, in unitary property taxes paid for tax year 2017/18. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: T-Mobile West LLC, Sprint Telephony PCS, LP, Sprint Communications Company, SFPP, L.P., and Lumen Technologies, Inc. (collectively, “Claimants”) have filed claims for refund of property taxes against the County and a number of other counties, essentially alleging that the statutory formula used to calculate their property tax rate violates the California Constitution. In November 2021, the County received the following claims for refund of taxes: T-Mobile West LLC ($223,797.36), Sprint Telephony PCS, LP ($140,725.74), and Sprint Communications Company ($7,112.72). In April 2022, the County received the following claims for refund of taxes: SFFP, L.P. ($293,867.56) and Lumen Technologies, Inc. ($30,828.90). (The claims are provided in Attachments A-E.) The claims, in the collective amount of $696,332.28, are only for tax year 2017/2018, which is the earliest year that claimants may seek to recover property taxes. (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 5097(a)(2).) APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Rebecca Hooley, County Counsel (925) 655-2200 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Bob Campbell, Laura Strobel C. 11 To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Deny claims filed for unitary property taxes paid for tax year 2017/18 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Some of these claimants have submitted refund claims for prior years based on the same allegation, which the County has denied. Other counties that have received refund claims from these claimants appear to have uniformly denied the claims. Litigation is currently in progress in Riverside County and Santa Clara County to determine whether the statutory tax rate imposed on property owned by these entities violates the California Constitution. ANALYSIS: Under the California Constitution, certain property owned or used by utilities and telecommunication companies, among others, is annually assessed by the State Board of Equalization ("BOE"). (Cal. Const., art. XIII, § 19.) The amount of such "unitary property" assessments attributed to the County by the BOE are then taxed by the County in accordance with a statutory formula. (See Rev. & Tax. Code, § 100.) The Auditor-Controller uses the amount of unitary property assessments annually provided by the BOE to calculate the amount of taxes to be levied on these properties in accordance with a formula mandated by state law (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 100). Based on this formula, the unitary tax rate for 2017/18 was 1.5948%. The Auditor-Controller has confirmed that the rate was correctly calculated pursuant to the State law, and the Office of the State Controller has deemed it correct. Claimants argue that they are entitled to a partial refund of taxes on the grounds that they were illegally levied because the formula used to calculate the rate is unconstitutional. However, the County is given no discretion on its calculation of the unitary tax rate; it is a mandated formula set by the State. Because of this, the Auditor-Controller has no power to declare it unenforceable “on the basis of it being unconstitutional unless an appellate court has made a determination that such statute is unconstitutional.” [Cal. Const., art. III, § 3.5(a); see also Boyer v. Ventura County (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 49.] For these reasons, the claims should be denied. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Failure to take the recommended action would result in interest continuing to accrue on a potential court-ordered refund of property taxes. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A - Kinder Morgan SFPP Claim Attachment B - Lumen Techs Claim Attachment C - Sprint Comms Claim Attachment D - Sprint Telephony Claim Attachment E - T-Mobile Claim RECOMMENDATION(S): DENY claims filed by Beatriz Adriana Cardenas, Ezekiel Johnson, Ean D. Prado-Rodriguez and Mark and Mary Shepherd (3). FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Beatriz Adriana Cardenas: Personal injury claim for car accident caused by allegedly dangerous condition in the amount of $1,000,000. Ezekiel Johnson: Personal injury claim stemming from altercation at Martinez Detention Facility in the amount of $9,000,000. Ian D. Prado-Rodriguez: Personal injury claim for car accident caused by allegedly dangerous condition in the amount of $1,000,000. Mark & Mary Shepherd (3): Personal injury claim arising from traffic collision in excess of $25,000. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Not acting on the claims could extend the claimants’ time limits to file actions against the County. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Risk Management I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 12 To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Claims RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT Board members meeting reports for August 2022. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Government Code section 53232.3(d) requires that members of legislative bodies report on meetings attended for which there has been expense reimbursement (mileage, meals, lodging ex cetera). The attached reports were submitted by the Board of Supervisors members in satisfaction of this requirement. District I, III and V have nothing to report. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Board of Supervisors will not be in compliance with Government Code 53232.3(d). APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Joellen Bergamini 925.655.2000 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 , County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 13 To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:ACCEPT Board members meeting reports for August 2022 ATTACHMENTS District II August 2022 Report District IV August 2022 Report Supervisor Candace Andersen, District 2 – AB1234 Monthly Meeting Report August 2022 Date Meeting Name Location ______ 2 Board of Supervisors Martinez 3 Mental Health Commission Zoom Meeting 4 TVTC Zoom Meeting 4 East Bay Innovations Oakland 8 Applicant interviews Danville office 8 Blackhawk HOA Blackhawk 9 Board of Supervisors Martinez 10 CCCERA Zoom meeting 10 LAFCO Zoom Meeting 11 EBEDA Zoom meeting 15 TVTC Zoom meeting 16 Board of Supervisors Zoom meeting 17 JJC Coordinating Council Zoom meeting 18 CCCTA Zoom meeting 18 ABAG Zoom meeting 19 Familiar Faces Zoom meeting 24 CCCERA Zoom meeting 25 Recycle Smart Zoom meeting Supervisor Karen Mitchoff August 2022 DATE MEETING NAME LOCATION PURPOSE 08/12/22 Signing docs as Chair of the Board Martinez Signing Documents APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Ashley Kokotaylo, 925-586-3094 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 14 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Recognizing Rusty Keilch for over 30 years of service upon her retirement CLERK'S ADDENDUM Speakers: Erika Jensen, Deputy Director, Contra Costa Health Services. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2022/308 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2022/308 In the matter of:Resolution No. 2022/308 Recognizing Rusty Keilch, Public Health Program Specialist II, for thirty-six years of service to Contra Costa Health Services and our community. WHEREAS, Rusty Keilch began her career with Contra Costa Health as a Health Educator with the Public Health Communicable Disease Program in 1986 and as the first full-time employee solely focused on the AIDS epidemic; and WHEREAS, in this position, Ms. Keilch provided information to schools and community groups about HIV during the beginning of the HIV epidemic including participating in system transformation through the HIV epidemic; and WHEREAS, Ms. Keilch, as the AIDS Program Director, worked tirelessly over an eleven year period with the Communicable Disease Chief, the Public Health Director and the community, leading the development of the HIV/AIDS Program and participating in all aspects of the County’s response to the HIV epidemic; and WHEREAS, Ms. Keilch transitioned to Public Health Family, Maternal and Child Health Programs where she works closely with the Director supporting program development for twenty-five years; and WHEREAS, over the course of the last two years, Ms. Keilch played an instrumental role in providing leadership and continuity to the Family, Maternal and Child Health Programs during the everchanging landscape of the COVID pandemic. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors hereby recognizes and honors Rusty Keilch for thirty-six years of public service and gives its full appreciation for her commitment to the people of Contra Costa County upon her retirement. ___________________ KAREN MITCHOFF Chair, District IV Supervisor ______________________________________ JOHN GIOIA CANDACE ANDERSEN District I Supervisor District II Supervisor ______________________________________ DIANE BURGIS FEDERAL D. GLOVER District III Supervisor District V Supervisor I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator By: ____________________________________, Deputy APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Lauri Byers 925 655-2300 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 15 To:Board of Supervisors From:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Resolution Honoring Al Kalin for his outstanding achievements to promote and ensure safe cycling. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2022/323 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2022/323 In the matter of:Resolution No. 2022/323 recognizing Al Kalin for his outstanding achievements to promote and ensure safe cycling. Whereas: Al Kalin has championed safety improvements for cyclists on Mount Diablo for the past decade, and Whereas: Al Kalin recognized the need for the cycling community to come together to speak with one voice and originated and leads an organization called Mount Diablo Cyclists focused on improving safety and awareness of safety issues on Mount Diablo; and Whereas: Al Kalin worked with Mount Diablo State Park officials to install signage and double yellow lane stripping on Mount Diablo beginning in 2014 discouraging drivers from passing cyclists on blind curves and asking cyclists to slow down when descending; and Whereas: Al Kalin requested the help of elected officials to secure over $1.5 million in funding from the State of California for bike turnouts in Mount Diablo State Park and worked with Park officials to identify and prioritize turnout locations; and Whereas: Al Kalin made an enormous effort to consult every public resource for information on bicycle versus vehicle collisions on Mount Diablo from the State Park, California Highway Patrol, County Sheriff, and Danville Police, including Freedom of Information Act requests; and Whereas: Al Kalin continuously promoted collaboration between Mount Diablo Cyclists and Park officials to ensure that the turnouts were placed in areas most prone to bicycle versus vehicle collisions. that the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors congratulates Al Kalin for his outstanding achievements to promote and ensure safe cycling on Mount Diablo and the surrounding area. His tireless efforts have demonstrably improved cyclist safety on Mount Diablo, significantly reduced the chances for bike versus vehicle collisions, and helped to make the drive up Mount Diablo easier, safer, and more enjoyable for motorists. ___________________ KAREN MITCHOFF Chair, District IV Supervisor ______________________________________ JOHN GIOIA CANDACE ANDERSEN District I Supervisor District II Supervisor ______________________________________ DIANE BURGIS FEDERAL D. GLOVER District III Supervisor District V Supervisor I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator By: ____________________________________, Deputy RECOMMENDATION(S): PROCLAIM September 2022 Intergenerational Month APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Tamina Alon, 925-608-4890 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 16 To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:PROCLAIM September 2022 as Intergenerational Month AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2022/328 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2022/328 In the matter of:Resolution No. 2022/328 In the matter of: Proclaiming September 2022 as Intergenerational Month WHEREAS, Intergenerational Month raises awareness about the power of making respectful and reciprocal intergenerational connections; and WHEREAS, Intergenerational Month is a time to remember the importance of inclusion of people of all ages, backgrounds, and abilities; and WHEREAS, Intergenerational Month encourages simple, fun intergenerational sharing; and WHEREAS, Intergenerational Month affirms that people of every age have much to contribute, teach and learn, in our communities; and WHEREAS, Intergenerational Month recognizes the strengths of each generation and empowers people of all ages to be involved in all aspects of their lives and communities; and WHEREAS, Intergenerational Month is a reminder and invitation for everyone to take one small step to bridge generations within our communities; and WHEREAS, Intergenerational Month celebrates the good things presently taking place between generations in local communities, and WHEREAS, Intergenerational Month is a day time to celebrate the profound positive influence that intergenerational connections have on eliminating isolation and loneliness, and on moving towards healthy, all-age friendly communities; and WHEREAS, the Contra Costa Alliance to End Abuse, the Family Justice Center, and the Black Neighborhood acknowledge the importance and value of intergenerational connections to prevent interpersonal violence. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved: that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County does hereby proclaim September 2022 as INTERGENERATIONAL MONTH, and urges all residents to actively engage in efforts to foster strong connections across ages. During Intergenerational Month, let us support all generations to actively come together to participate and contribute in our communities. ___________________ KAREN MITCHOFF Chair, District IV Supervisor ______________________________________ JOHN GIOIA CANDACE ANDERSEN District I Supervisor District II Supervisor ______________________________________ DIANE BURGIS FEDERAL D. GLOVER District III Supervisor District V Supervisor I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator By: ____________________________________, Deputy APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Lauri Byers 925 655-2300 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 17 To:Board of Supervisors From:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Resolution recognizing Jay Lifson upon his retirement from the Lafayette Chamber of Commerce AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2022/327 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2022/327 In the matter of:Resolution No. 2022/327 recognizing Jay Lifson upon his retirement from the Lafayette Chamber of Commerce. Jay Lifson has been the Executive Director of the Lafayette Chamber of Commerce since April of 2005, and has been a leader in the hospitality industry for over 35 years; and Whereas, Jay is an alumnus of UC Berkeley and completed the HR Management, and the Training & Development Certification Programs. He is a graduate of the Western Association of Chamber Executives Academy, and Leadership Contra Costa; and Whereas, Jay was named the Lafayette Business Person of the Year in 2012, he was honored as a Sustainable Contra Costa Lifetime Achievement Award Recipient in 2022, and has served as a loyal and active member of the Lafayette Rotary Club for 15 years; and Whereas, before coming to the Lafayette Chamber of Commerce Jay worked in the restaurant industry, helping to run fine establishments, and eventually being a co-owner of his own restaurant; he also served as the food and beverage director for the Lafayette Park Hotel; and Whereas, when Jay arrived at the Chamber, he developed a robust organization to support local businesses, he helped grow the Lafayette Art and Wine Festival into the hugely popular event it is now, he added the Reservoir Run, supported the restaurant walk enjoyed by all local residents, and he was a huge fan and promoter of the Plaza Concerts that became a regular June Friday night event; and Whereas, during the COVID-19 Pandemic Jay worked tirelessly to help local businesses stay open and be successful in spite of the many health related restrictions in place; he carefully tracked each new health order and immediately sought clarification from County officials when something was ambiguous or unclear; that Supervisor Candace Andersen will truly miss working with Jay on Lafayette issues and the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County does hereby honor and thank Jay Lifson For his dedicated service to Lafayette, it’s businesses and residents. ___________________ KAREN MITCHOFF Chair, District IV Supervisor ______________________________________ JOHN GIOIA CANDACE ANDERSEN District I Supervisor District II Supervisor ______________________________________ DIANE BURGIS FEDERAL D. GLOVER District III Supervisor District V Supervisor I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator By: ____________________________________, Deputy APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Dominic Aliano, 925-608-4200 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 18 To:Board of Supervisors From:Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Proclaiming the Month of September, 2022, as National Recovery Month in Contra Costa County AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2022/330 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2022/330 In the matter of:Resolution No. 2022/330 Proclaiming the Month of September, 2022, as National Recovery Month in Contra Costa County WHEREAS, Alcohol and Other Drug abuse and Mental Health disorders affect all communities nationwide, with commitment and support, impacted can embark on a journey of improved health and overall wellness; WHEREAS, the focus of Recovery Month each September is to celebrate all people that make the journey of recovery possible by embracing the tagline "Recovery is for Everyone: Every Person, Every Family, Every Community;" WHEREAS, through Recovery Month, people become more aware and able to recognize the signs of Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse and Mental Health disorders and encourage people in need of recovery services to seek help; WHEREAS, managing the effects of these conditions helps individuals achieve healthy lifestyles, both physically and emotionally; WHEREAS, the Recovery Month observance continues to work to improve the lives of those affected by Alcohol and Other Drug abuse and Mental Health disorders by raising awareness and educating communities about the effective services that are available; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors, do hereby proclaim the month of September as Recovery Month in Contra Costa County and call upon our community to observe this month with compelling programs and events that support this year's observance, the 32nd anniversary of Recovery Month. ___________________ KAREN MITCHOFF Chair, District IV Supervisor ______________________________________ JOHN GIOIA CANDACE ANDERSEN District I Supervisor District II Supervisor ______________________________________ DIANE BURGIS FEDERAL D. GLOVER District III Supervisor District V Supervisor I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator By: ____________________________________, Deputy RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Ordinance No. 2022-32, an ordinance amending the County’s Better Government Ordinance to remove subdivision (e) of Section 25-4.404 regarding attorney-client communications. FISCAL IMPACT: Fiscal impacts are unknown. BACKGROUND: On September 13, 2022, the Board of Supervisors voted to introduce Ordinance No. 2022-32, to amend the Better Government Ordinance to remove subdivision (e) of Section 25-4.404. The Board waived the reading of the ordinance and made the following findings: (a) restoring the full privilege for records of attorney-client communications by deleting Section 25-4.404, subdivision (e) serves the public interest by allowing the County and its officials to receive unfettered legal advice on a variety of matters to aid decision-making and reduce legal exposure and to assert the full scope of the privilege afforded by State law to aid the County’s defense of litigation; and (b) pursuant to Article 1, Section 3(b)(2) of the California Constitution, there is a need to protect the attorney-client privilege by amending the Better Government Ordinance to remove the waiver of the exemption for records of certain attorney-client communications in subdivision (e) of Section 25-4.404 of the County Ordinance Code. The Board also set September 20, 2022 for adoption of Ordinance No. 2022-32. If adopted, Ordinance No. 2022-32 will be effective on October 20, 2022. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Mary Ann McNett Mason, County Counsel (925) 655-2200 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Mary Ann McNett Mason, County Counsel, Monica Nino, County Administrator, Jami Morritt, Chief Assistant Clerk of the Board C. 19 To:Board of Supervisors From:Mary Ann Mason, County Counsel Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment of County Ordinance Code to restore exemption from disclosure of certain attorney client privileged records BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The California Public Records Act and the Better Government Ordinance The California Public Records Act (“PRA”), codified in Government Code section 6250 et seq., was enacted in 1968 to give the public a tool to monitor government operations. In this regard, the PRA gives the public the right to obtain copies of non-exempt public records. Nearly three decades ago, in 1995, the County enacted the Better Government Ordinance (“BGO”) (Division 25 of the County Ordinance Code) to provide additional public access to certain records. Pursuant to Evidence Code section 954, attorney-client communications are privileged and confidential. Under the PRA, attorney-client privileged communications are exempt from disclosure in response to a record request pursuant to Government Code section 6254(k), which exempts “[r]ecords, the disclosure of which is exempted or prohibited pursuant to federal or state law, including, but not limited to, provisions of the Evidence Code relating to privilege.” However, the BGO removed this protection for certain attorney-client records, thus permitting the disclosure of records of certain communications between the County’s legal advisor and County officers, departments, and policy bodies. (County Ord. Code, § 25-4.404(e).) These include records of those attorney-client communications that: (1) concern an actual or potential conflict of interest; (2) analyze a proposed legislative action or position of the county; (3) analyze or interpret the Ralph M. Brown Act, the PRA, or the BGO; and (4) constitute reports to the Board of Supervisors on the progress of negotiation of a matter after the negotiation is completed. (Id.) With this waiver, members of the public can obtain such records (to the extent they are not exempt from disclosure pursuant to a different exemption) under the BGO. The Attorney-Client Privilege Under State law, the attorney-client privilege is regarded as sacred. (People v. Flores (1977) 71 Cal.App.3d 559, 565.) The privilege is absolute and disclosure may not be ordered, regardless of the circumstances. (Gordon v. Superior Court (1997) 55 Cal.App.4th 1546, 1557.) Courts recognize that “effective aid is impossible” without the ability to provide confidential legal advice. (Sacramento Newspaper Guild, etc. v. Sacramento County Board of Supervisors (1967) 255 Cal.App.2d 51, 54.) Courts also recognize the strong public interest in ensuring that communications between public agencies and their attorneys remain confidential. (Roberts v. City of Palmdale (1993) 5 Cal.4th 363, 381-82 (“The public interest is served by the privilege because it permits local government agencies to seek advice that may prevent the agency from becoming embroiled in litigation, and it may permit the agency to avoid unnecessary controversy with various members of the public.”); St. Croix v. Superior Court (2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 434, 443 (“…the privilege’s protection of the confidentiality of written attorney-client communications is fundamental to the attorney-client relationship, in the public sector as well as in the private sector, and is vital to the effective administration of justice.”).) The privilege is so critical that attorneys are required to “maintain inviolate the confidence, and at every peril to himself or herself to preserve the secrets, of his or her client.” (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6068(e)(1).) Section 25-4.404(e) is inconsistent with these deep-seated protections for attorney-client communications in State law. In fact, Contra Costa County is an outlier as to this issue, as most counties do not waive the attorney-client privilege in this manner. The Impacts of the Waiver of the Attorney-Client Privilege The County values transparency and the full and prompt production of disclosable records in response to public records requests. The County has a detailed Administrative Bulletin (No. 120.6), which provides guidance to County departments and employees regarding legal obligations under the PRA, as well as the proper and efficient handling of records requests. The County also provides training to officials, bodies, and employees regarding the PRA. However, the lack of protection under the BGO for records of certain attorney-client communications has negatively impacted the County and worked against the public’s interest in efficient and effective government operations. For example, this provision has interfered with the ability of County legal advisors, who have ethical duties to their clients, to communicate fully with and provide written advice to department representatives, elected officials, and policy bodies regarding conflict-of-interest issues, proposed legislative actions or positions, open meeting and public records issues, and certain negotiations. This provision impedes the advisors’ ability to convey unfettered advice to clients and can have detrimental effects on the County’s position in litigation and other legal matters, as adversaries and others may become aware of the substance of this advice. In addition, this waiver results in an unlevel playing field for the County, as private parties are not required to release their communications in the same manner. In recent years, and particularly during the Covid pandemic, the County has received more public record requests than in the past. This increase in the volume of public records requests necessarily increases the risk of litigation. In fact, the County faced six writ petitions in recent years, alleging violations of the PRA. The County’s position in such litigation could be undermined if the County were required to release attorney-client communications regarding matters that are the subject of the court proceeding. Impact of Ordinance 2022-32 This amendment will update the BGO to eliminate the waiver of the attorney-client privilege for the types of records described above, aligning the County’s ordinance code with State law protections for these attorney-client records and with the practice of most other counties. This action recognizes the strong public policies upon which the attorney-client privilege is based, as well as the significant public interest in efficient government operations. Protecting the attorney-client privilege furthers the compelling public interest in ensuring that the County has effective legal representation and that the County’s legal interests are not adversely impacted by the non-discretionary disclosure of records that under State law would remain confidential. This ordinance would not otherwise modify the provisions of the BGO. Section 25-4.404 would continue to include all other existing provisions regarding access to records, including access to records of prelitigation claims, settlement communications, and settlement agreements. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the BGO is not amended, records of certain attorney-client privileged communications will remain subject to potential public disclosure. The County’s relationship with its legal advisors will continue to be negatively impacted and the ability of County departments, officers, and bodies to receive thorough and effective legal assistance and the best possible defense to litigation will continue to be jeopardized. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Ordinance No. 2022-32 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Ordinance 2022-32 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-32 Page 1 of 1 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-32 AMENDING THE COUNTY’S BETTER GOVERNMENT ORDINANCE The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows (omitting the parenthetical footnotes from the official text of the enacted or amended provisions of the County Ordinance Code): SECTION I. SUMMARY. This ordinance amends the County’s Better Government Ordinance to remove the waiver of the exemption for records of certain attorney-client communications in subdivision (e) of Section 25-4.404 of the County Ordinance Code. SECTION II. Section 25-4.404 of the County Ordinance Code is amended by deleting subdivision (e), and by renumbering subdivisions (f) and (g) as subdivisions (e) and (f), respectively. (Ord. Nos. 95-6, 2022-32) SECTION III. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance becomes effective 30 days after passage, and within 15 days after passage shall be published once with the names of supervisors voting for or against it in the East Bay Times, a newspaper published in this County. PASSED ON _______________________, 2022, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: MONICA NINO, ____________________________ Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Board Chair and County Administrator By: _________________________ [SEAL] Deputy HMS: RECOMMENDATION(S): REAPPOINT the following individual to the District IV seat on the Emergency Medical Care Committee (EMCC) to a two-year term to expire on September 30, 2024. Allan Tobias Walnut Creek, CA 94598 FISCAL IMPACT: none BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors (Authority), established the Contra Costa County EMCC (Resolutions 68/404, 77/637, 79/460 and by Board Order on February 24, 1998) in accordance with the California Health and Safety Code Division 2.5, Chapter 4, Article 3, to act in an advisory capacity to the Board and the County Health Services Director on matters relating to emergency medical services. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Lisa Chow, (925) 655-2350 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 20 To:Board of Supervisors From:Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:REAPPOINT Allan Tobias to the District IV seat on the Emergency Medical Care Committee CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Seat would be vacant which could impact the committee's ability to achieve a quorum. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT Dulce Galicia as the unincorporated North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council representative on the North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee Committee. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact to the County General Fund. BACKGROUND: Dr. Henry Clark passed away on June 2, 2022. As a result, his seat as the unincorporated North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council representative (North Richmond MAC Representative 1) on the North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee Committee was declared vacant. Supervisor Gioia has selected Dulce Galicia to fill the vacancy as the unincorporated North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council representative on the North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee Committee. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The unincorporated North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council representative seat on the North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee Committee will remain vacant. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: None APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Tania Pulido, 510-942-2225 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 21 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Appointment to the North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee Committee RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT Darien Key to the Public at Large seat on the Local Enforcement Agency Independent Hearing Panel to a term that will expire on March 31, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: In 1992, the Board of Supervisors, in its capacity as the governing body of the County Local Enforcement Agency, adopted Resolution No. 92/153, which, among other things, appointed the full Board to serve as the hearing panel, a body that implements enforcement and permitting activities at local solid waste facilities, pursuant to a statute that was later repealed. Under current law, hearings regarding the above matters may be conducted by either a hearing officer or by a hearing panel, which may be either (1) a panel of three members of the LEA governing body or (2) an independent three-member panel appointed. (Pub. Resources Code, § 44308.) The Panel will hear matters related to solid waste enforcement, permits, and appeals. The California Code of Regulations requires the appointment of either an independent hearing panel or hearing officer when in the jurisdiction of the LEA there exists a publicly owned or operated solid waste facility or disposal site. In Contra Costa County, the following jurisdictions own solid waste facilities: City of El Cerrito (Registration Tier Permit Transfer Station), City of Brentwood (Brentwood Transfer Station), City of Martinez (Martinez City Rubbish-closed landfill), City of Richmond (Naval Fuel Depot Pt. Molate-closed landfill), the City of Antioch (Antioch City Landfill-closed landfill), and the California Department of Water Resources (Banks Delta Pumping-closed dump site in Byron). For this reason, CalRecycle recommended that an independent hearing panel be established. CalRecycle also advised that there can be only one LEA hearing panel. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Julie DiMaggio Enea 925.655.2056 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: LEAIHP Staff, CAO (Enea) C. 22 To:Board of Supervisors From:INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:RECOMMENDATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE LOCAL ENFORCEMENT AGENCY INDEPENDENT HEARING PANEL BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) On November 5, 2013, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 2013/423, establishing the Contra Costa County Local Enforcement Agency Independent Hearing Panel. The Board, at that time, decided that it would not appoint one of its members to the LEA Hearing Panel and subsequently referred to the IOC the recruitment of three County resident nominees, for BOS consideration, to serve on the panel. As a result of the 2013 recruitment, the Board of Supervisors appointed the first Independent LEA Hearing Panel, composed by Daryl Young, Larry Sweetser (technical expert), and Ana Cortez. Ana Cortez was later replaced by Victoria Smith. On March 22, 2022, the Board of Supervisors appointed Victoria Smith and Joe Doser to the Panel to terms that will expire on March 31, 2026. The IOC continued recruitment to fill the third and remaining vacancy. Among the specific duties of the County LEA are the permitting of solid waste facilities. Solid waste facilities include solid waste transfer or processing stations, composting facilities, transformation facilities and disposal facilities. The permitting process includes the issuance of solid waste facilities permits as well as the denial, revision, modification, suspension and revocation of permits. The County LEA also performs regular inspections of solid waste facilities. A solid waste facility is required to comply with applicable laws and regulations and the terms and conditions of any solid waste facilities permit issued by the County LEA to the facility. Compliance is usually achieved through inspection reports and compliance schedules. Where violations are found, the County LEA works with affected parties on corrective measures as long as those parties make a good faith effort to comply with the requirements. Public Resources Code section 44308 governs appointments to the Hearing Panel as follows: No more than one member of the Board of Supervisors shall serve on the Hearing Panel.1. Members of the Hearing Panel shall be selected for their legal, administrative, or technical abilities in areas relating to solid waste management. 2. At least one member shall be a technical expert with knowledge of solid waste management methods and technology.3. At least one member shall be a representative of the public at large.4. A member shall serve for a term of four years and may not serve more than two consecutive terms.5. Since its establishment in 2013, the Hearing Panel has met twice in Concord (one hearing, split into two evening sessions). On July 19, the County received the application (attached) of Darien Key of Pleasant Hill for the Public at Large seat on the LEA Independent Hearing Panel. Mr. Key has served as a public agency/environmental attorney for four years advising on public agency issues such as Brown Act, Conflicts of Interest, SB 1383 (organics recycling, CEQA, and Propositions 218 (property related fees and assessments) and 26 (supermajority vote for new taxes). The IOC interviewed Mr. Key at its regular meeting on September 12 and recommends his appointment to the Public at Large seat on the LEA Independent Hearing Panel. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The California Code of Regulations requires the appointment of either an independent hearing panel or hearing officer when in the jurisdiction of the LEA there exists a publicly owned or operated solid waste facility or disposal site. Failure to appoint an independent hearing panel would necessitate appointment of a hearing officer. ATTACHMENTS Application_Key Darien (LEAIHP) Submit Date: Jul 07, 2022 First Name Middle Initial Last Name Home Address Suite or Apt City State Postal Code Primary Phone Email Address Employer Job Title Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions Application Form Profile District Locator Tool Resident of Supervisorial District: District 4 Length of Employment 1.5 years Do you work in Contra Costa County? Yes No If Yes, in which District do you work? At home - District 4 How long have you lived or worked in Contra Costa County? 2.5 years Are you a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces? Yes No Board and Interest Which Boards would you like to apply for? Local Enforcement Agency Independent Hearing Panel: Submitted Darien Darien Key Key Pleasant Hill CA 94523 Adams Broadwell Attorney Darien Darien Key Key Seat Name Darien Key Have you ever attended a meeting of the advisory board for which you are applying? Yes No If Yes, how many meetings have you attended? Education Select the option that applies to your high school education * High School Diploma College/ University A Name of College Attended San Diego State University Degree Type / Course of Study / Major History/ BA Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University B Name of College Attended University of San Diego School of Law Degree Type / Course of Study / Major JD Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University C Name of College Attended Darien Key Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Darien Darien Key Key Upload a Resume Degree Awarded? Yes No Other Trainings & Occupational Licenses Other Training A Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Other Training B Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Occupational Licenses Completed: California State Bar License 324353 Qualifications and Volunteer Experience Please explain why you would like to serve on this particular board, commitee, or commission. I have served as a public agency/environmental attorney for 4 years advising on public agency issues such as Brown Act, Conflicts of Interest, SB 1383, CEQA, Prop 218 and 26. This type of work has given me experience with the type of work committees perform and the subject matter they cover. Describe your qualifications for this appointment. (NOTE: you may also include a copy of your resume with this application) Please see resume Would you like to be considered for appointment to other advisory bodies for which you may be qualified? Yes No Do you have any obligations that might affect your attendance at scheduled meetings? Yes No If Yes, please explain: Darien Darien Key Key Are you currently or have you ever been appointed to a Contra Costa County advisory board? Yes No If Yes, please list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you are currently serving: California If Yes, please also list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you have previously served: California List any volunteer or community experience, including any advisory boards on which you have served. Conflict of Interest and Certification Do you have a familial or financial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer to the relationships listed under the "Important Information" section below or Resolution No. 2021/234) Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relationships? Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Represent labor unions and community coalitions involved in the construction trade who are occasionally involved with projects which go before the Contra Costa County Planning Commission and BOS. The boards selected should have no conflicts of interest since they do not involve decisions regarding the construction trades Darien Darien Key Key Please Agree with the Following Statement I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and undersand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand that misstatements and/or omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. I Agree Important Information 1. This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: (1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and (2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. 5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 7. As indicated in Board Resolution 2021/234, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' member in any of the following relationships: (1) Mother, father, son, and daughter; (2) Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter; (3) Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter; (4) Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297; (5) The relatives, as defined in 1 and 2 above, for a registered domestic partner; (6) Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103, Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate. Darien Darien Key Key DARIEN KEY Pleasant Hill, 94523 • Licensed to Practice in California: State Bar Number 324353 Licensed to Practice in Eastern and Central Districts of California EDUCATION University of San Diego School of Law, San Diego, CA Juris Doctor May 2018 Honors: GPA 3.31; CALI Award (Highest Grade) Animal Law and Ocean & Coastal Law; Student Leadership Scholarship 2016 – 2018; Sherwood and Janet Roberts Blue Memorial Scholarship 2015 – 2018; Activities: Former Editor–In–Chief of Journal of Climate & Energy Law San Diego State University, San Diego, CA Bachelor of Arts in History with Arabic and Islamic Studies minor, cum laude, May 2014 Honors: GPA 3.54; Dean’s list six consecutive semesters Adams Broadwell, PC, South San Francisco, CA Attorney February 2021 – Current Participated in the administrative process practicing land use and environmental law, including CEQA with various municipalities particularly drafting CEQA comment letters. Participated in the administrative rule-making process before the California Public Utilities Commission. Assisted clients in navigating municipal processes particularly Brown Act, Prop 218, Public Records requests, and conflicts of interest compliance. Hanson Bridgett, LLP, San Francisco, CA Attorney December 2019 – January 2021 Served as assistant general counsel and special counsel to California special districts, particularly in Brown Act, Prop 218, Public Records requests, and conflicts of interest compliance. Assisted client staff in drafting and managing public procurements and procurements for public works projects. Assisted public entity clients in litigation defense by drafting answers, motions, legal memorandums, and settlements as well as propounding and responding to discovery in California and federal court. Klein DeNatale Goldner, LLP, Bakersfield, CA Attorney/Law Clerk September 2018 – November 2019 Served as general counsel to California water and sanitary districts, particularly in SGMA, Brown Act, Prop 218, Public Records requests, and conflicts of interest compliance. Drafted and prepared pleadings such as complaints, answers, motions, legal memorandums, and settlements as well as propounded and responded to discovery in California and federal court. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C. June 2017 – July 2017 Law Clerk Clerked in the Office of Enforcement and Compliance for Safe Drinking Water. Researched and drafted statutory, regulatory, and administrative interpretation memos of the Safe Drinking Water Act and the agency’s duty under the Act. Drafted guidance documents for the regulated community to ensure compliance with EPA regulations. American Bar Association, Water Resources Newsletter, Mexican Sewage in American Waters: Who Is Responsible for Fixing the Sewage Crisis? Hanson Bridgett, The Brown Act Finally Meets Social Media. Hanson Bridgett, Governor's Executive Order N-42-20 Restricts the Ability of Water Service Providers to Shut Off Water Service. CERTIFICATION EXPERIENCE PUBLICATIONS AND ORGANIZATIONS RECOMMENDATION(S): ESTABLISH the Ad Hoc Arts Council Steering Committee and APPROVE its mission and committee composition. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact arising from the establishment of an Ad Hoc Arts Council Steering Committee. BACKGROUND: The Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County (also known as AC5) was established in 1994 to advise the Board of Supervisors in matters and issues relevant to arts and culture; to advance the arts in a way that promotes communication, education, appreciation, and collaboration throughout Contra Costa County; to preserve, celebrate, and share the arts and culture of the many diverse ethnic groups who live in Contra Costa County; to create partnerships with business and government; and to increase communications and understanding between all citizens through art. Most importantly, the mission of the Commission was to promote arts and culture as a vital element in the quality of life for all citizens of Contra Costa County. While AC5’s work was instrumental in the development and support of numerous vital arts and culture programs and initiatives over the years, the organizational structure was ultimately deemed not as constructive to the mission as a public-private partnership Arts Council could be. On March 29, 2022, the Board of Supervisors dissolved the Arts and Culture Commission and directed County Administration staff to procure or establish a nonprofit public-private partnership Arts Council for the county, to serve as the county’s State-Local Partner (SLP) with the California Arts Council (CAC). On May 3, 2022, County Administration staff issued Request for Qualifications (RFQ) #2205-564 seeking a qualified organization or individual to provide project management and public engagement facilitation services for the purpose of developing a Request for Proposals (RFP) to procure a nonprofit organization to be the designated public-private partner Arts Council for the county. Two responses to RFQ #2205-564 were received by the deadline of Friday, May 27, 2022. A Review Panel consisting of County Administration staff and Arts Council representatives from northern California reviewed the responses and conducted interviews with the respondents. After extensive deliberation and careful consideration by the Review Panel, the Panel recommended the County not award the contract to either of the respondents. Instead, the Review Panel recommended the County revise and release a subsequent RFQ. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: L. DeLaney, 925-655-2057 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 23 To:Board of Supervisors From:INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Establishment of an Ad Hoc Arts Council Steering Committee On July 29, 2022, County Administration staff issued RFQ #2207-578 seeking a qualified organization to provide project management and community engagement facilitation services for the purposes of conducting a robust and inclusive arts and cultural planning process, leading to the creation of a new Arts & Cultural Master Plan for the county, and working with County Administration staff to develop a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the selection or establishment of a public-private partner Arts Council for the county. By the deadline of August 22, 2022, two responses to RFQ #2207-578 were received. The Review Panel conducted interviews with the two respondents on August 29, 2022, and recommended that Arts Orange County be awarded the $75,000 contract. On August 2, 2022, the Board of Supervisors referred to the Internal Operations Committee the establishment of an Ad Hoc Arts Council Steering Committee. At its September 12, 2022 meeting, the Internal Operations (IO) Committee (Chair Burgis, Vice Chair Andersen) supported the establishment of a seven-member Ad Hoc Arts Council Steering Committee and directed staff to commence a three-week application period for applicants to the Committee. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) MISSION: The mission of the Ad Hoc Arts Council Steering Committee is to guide the County's arts and cultural planning efforts through an inclusive community engagement process; provide input and collaboration with County staff and the consultant on the Arts Council procurement or establishment process; ensure diversity, equity, and inclusion throughout the process and outcomes; and listen to the community. MEMBERSHIP: The Ad Hoc Arts Council Steering Committee will consist of up to seven members, who will represent the geographic and demographic diversity of the county and include representatives from the following: Former Contra Costa Arts & Culture Commissioners and/or Managing Directors Representatives of County departments with interest in arts and culture Members of local arts and culture commissions/committees/foundations Artists and representatives of local arts and culture organizations Municipalities and Chambers of Commerce leaders School District Representatives and leaders of education Black, Indigenous and People of Color The IO Committee is expected to interview applicants at its October 10 meeting. MEETINGS: After formation, the Ad Hoc Arts Council Steering Committee will meet monthly with the consultant and County staff on the public engagement and arts/cultural planning progress and provide input and guidance. Meetings held by the Ad Hoc Arts Council Steering Committee will be facilitated by the consultant with support from County staff and are subject to public meeting rules governed by the Brown Act and Better Governance Ordinance. TERMS OF OFFICE: Board consideration of IO Committee recommendations is expected at the October 18, 2022 meeting. The Ad Hoc Arts Council Steering Committee will be dissolved once an organization is established as the Arts Council for the county. STAFF: Senior Deputy County Administrator, Lara DeLaney Senior Management Analyst, Monica Carlisle RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26025 to add one (1) Administrative Services Assistant II-Project (APV2) position at salary plan and grade Z25-1475 ($6,129-$7,449) in the Health Services Department. (Represented) FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this action will result in an annual cost of approximately $147,366 with $33,018 in pension costs included. (50% Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSAA), 50% American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA)) BACKGROUND: The Alcohol and Other Drug Services (AODS) in the Health Services Department is requesting to add one (1) Administrative Services Assistant II-Project position. AODS received grant funding from CRRSAA and ARPA to implement the expansion of substance use programs and aid in COVID relief in various areas. Both sources of federal funding have mandatory reporting requirements. The Administrative Services Assistant II-Project position will provide proper monitoring of program expenditures and mandatory reporting to the Department of Health Care Services for recovery residences, primary prevention, and other expenditures associated with the CRRSAA and ARPA. This position is necessary for providing additional administrative support for the expansion of substance use services. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the Alcohol and Other Drugs Services will not have adequate staffing to monitor and report program expenditures, which will hinder the department from meeting the requirements of program funding. AODS may forfeit current funding and negatively impact its ability to receive future grants from any federal or state funds. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: 925-957-5267 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jenny Nguyen, Jo-Anne Linares, Kathi Caudel, Cheryl Shipley, Fatima Mata Sol, Mary McLain, Danelyn Razon C. 24 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Add one (1) Administrative Services Assistant II-Project position in the Health Services Department. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 No. 26025 HSD MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 26025 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 26025 DATE 8/24/2022 Department No./ Department Health Services Budget Unit No. 0466 Org No. 5938 Agenc y No. A18 Action Requested: Add one (1) full-time Administrative Services Assistant II-Project (APV2) position in the Health Services department. Proposed Effective Date: 9/21/2022 Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) associated with request: $0.00 Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time): Total annual cost $147,366.71 Net County Cost $0.00 Total this FY $122,805.59 N.C.C. this FY $0.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT 50% CRRSAA, 50% A merican Rescue Plan Act Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Jenny Nguyen ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Sarah Kennard for 9/12/2022 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE Exempt from Human Resources review under delegated authority. Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resourc es Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 9/14/2022 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Enid Mendoza Other: ____________________________________________ ___________________________________ (for) County Administrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: Monica Nino, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator DATE BY APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTES A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows: P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department 0466 Date 8/24/2022 No. 1. Project Positions Requested: One (1) Administrative Services Assistant II-Project 2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s) The Administrative Services Assistant II-Project position will provide proper monitoring of program expenditures and provide mandatory reporting to the Department of Health Care Services for recovery residences, primary prevention, an d other expenditures associated with the CRRSAA and ARPA. 3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds) Alcohol and Other Drug Services (AODS) received funding from the Coronavirus Repsonse and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act and American Rescue Plan Act to implement the expansion of substance use programs and aid in COVID relief in various areas. Both sources of federal funding have mandatory reporting requirements . 4. Duration of the Project: Start Date 9/1/2022 End Date 9/1/2025 Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year -to-year basis? Please explain. 2022-2025 period 5. Project Annual Cost a. Salary & Benefits Costs: $147,366.71 b. Support Costs: (services, supplies, equipment, etc.) c. Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund: 6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of: a. potential future costs d. political implications b. legal implications e. organizational implications c. financial implications AODS will not have adequate staffing to monitor and report program expenditures, which will hinder the department from meeting the requirements of program funding. 7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have considered. Indicate why these alternatives were not chosen. N/A 8. Departments requesting new project positions must s ubmit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resources Department, which will forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date tha t your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted December 2022, 2023, 2024 9. How will the project position(s) be filled? a. Competitive examination(s) b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)? c. Direct appointment of: 1. Merit Syst em employee who will be placed on leave from current job 2. Non-County employee Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26026 to add one (1) Registered Health Information Technologist (VITA) position at salary plan and grade K65-1337 ($5,346-$6498) in the Health Services Department. (Represented) FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this action will result in an annual cost of approximately $130,829 with $28,801 in pension cost included. The additional cost will be funded 100% by Mental Health Realignment revenue. BACKGROUND: The Behavioral Health Administration in the Health Services Department is requesting to add one (1) Registered Health Information Technologist. Due to the added complexity of handling medical records, the department is requesting this position to provide oversight and guidance to the current Medical Records Technicians. The Registered Health Information Technologist will provide training and support in the management of electronic health records systems, and respond to requests for sensitive information while adhering to the confidentiality of substance use disorder patient records. This position is necessary to adhere to the standards and constant updates to the complex electronic health records systems. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the Behavioral Health Administration will continue to struggle to maintain the standards of managing complex electronic health records systems. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: 925-957-5267 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jenny Nguyen, Jo-Anne Linares, Kathi Caudel, Cheryl Shipley, Stacey Tupper , Faye Ny C. 25 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Add one (1) Registered Health Information Technologist in the Health Services Department. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 No. 26026 HSD MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 26026 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 26026 DATE 8/24/2022 Department No./ Department Health Services Budget Unit No. 0467 Org No. 5999 Agenc y No. A18 Action Requested: Add one (1) Registered Health Information Technologist (VITA) position in the Health Services Department. (Represented) Proposed Effective Date: 10/21/2022 Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) associated with request: Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time): Total annual cost $130,829.75 Net County Cost $0.00 Total this FY $109,024.79 N.C.C. this FY $0.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT 100% Mental Health Realignment Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Jenny Nguyen ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Sarah Kennard for 9/12/2022 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE Exempt from Human Resources review under delegated authority. Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 9/15/2022 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Enid Mendoza Other: ____________________________________________ ___________________________________ (for) County Administrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: Monica Nino, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator DATE BY APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTES A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows: P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Date No. 1. Project Positions Requested: 2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s) 3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds) 4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year-to-year basis? Please explain. 5. Project Annual Cost a. Salary & Benefits Costs: b. Support Costs: (services, supplies, equipment, etc.) c. Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund: 6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of: a. potential future costs d. political implications b. legal implications e. organizational implications c. financial implications 7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have considered. Indicate why these alternatives were not chosen. 8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resources Department, which will forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted 9. How will the project position(s) be filled? a. Competitive examination(s) b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)? c. Direct appointment of: 1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current job 2. Non-County employee Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26022 to add one (1) Administrative Services Assistant II (APVA) (represented) position at salary plan and grade ZB5 1475 ($6,129.06-$7,449.91) and cancel one (1) Assistant County Counsel-Exempt (2ED1) unrepresented position No. 6267 (vacant) at salary plan and grade B8E 2385 ($16,069.35-19,532.39) in the Office of the County Counsel. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Salary Savings. The action will result in an annual savings of approximately $194,000. BACKGROUND: The County Counsel’s office administrative needs have expanded to accommodate the increased needs of the office due to a growing number of staff and administrative duties. During the past two decades, the number of employees in the office has increased by 23%, growing from 44 employees to 54 employees. At the same time, the number of systems required to support the legal work has also increased, as has the reporting and administrative requirements. To help alleviate APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Wanda McAdoo, (925) 655-2211 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Wanda McAdoo, Sylvia WongTam C. 26 To:Board of Supervisors From:Mary Ann Mason, County Counsel Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Add one ASA II and cancel one Assistant County Counsel BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) some of the burden, adding an Administrative Services Assistant II will allow the office to delegate high-level and confidential administrative functions, which do not fall within the duties of the Account Clerk – Advanced position. The Account Clerk – Advanced position will be canceled in November when it becomes vacant. The result of this action will enable the Office of the County Counsel to hire in an administrative support classification that is commensurate with the delegated duties and effectively satisfy the increasing office’s administrative needs. Additionally, The Assistant County Counsel position was vacated after the appointment of the Chief Assistant County Counsel on August 1, 2022. Due to this vacancy, the office is requesting that the Assistant County Counsel position be canceled. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County Counsel will be unable to hire into the appropriate classification to alleviate increasing administrative needs. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS 50886_P300 26022 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 26022 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 26022 DATE 9/2/2022 Department No./ Department Office of the County Counsel Budget Unit No. 0030 Org No. 1700 Agency No. 17 Action Requested: Add one (1) full-time Administrative Services Assistant II (APVA) (represented) position and cancel one (1) full-time Assistant County Counsel (2ED1) (unrepresented) position in the Office of the County Counsel. Proposed Effective Date: 9/14/2022 Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) associated with request: $250.00 Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time): Total annual cost ($194,000.00) Net County Cost ($23,280.00) Total this FY ($162,000.00) N.C.C. this FY ($19,440.00) SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT Salary Savings Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Mary Ann McNett Mason ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT L.Strobel 9/2/22 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE 9/6/2022 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26022 to ADD one (1) full -time Administrative Services Assistant II (APVA) (represented) position at salary level ZB5 1475 ($6,129.06 -7,449.91) and cancel one (1) full -time Assistant County Counsel (2ED1) (unrepresented) position No. 6267 at salary level B8E 2385 ($16,069.35-$19,532.39) in the Office of the County Counsel. Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) Carol Berger 9/6/2022 ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Other: ____________________________________________ ___________________________________ (for) County Administrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: Monica Nino, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator DATE BY APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTES A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows: P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Date No. 1. Project Positions Requested: 2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s) 3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds) 4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year-to-year basis? Please explain. 5. Project Annual Cost a. Salary & Benefits Costs: b. Support Costs: (services, supplies, equipment, etc.) c. Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund: 6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of: a. potential future costs d. political implications b. legal implications e. organizational implications c. financial implications 7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have considered. Indicate why these alternatives were not chosen. 8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resources Department, which will forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted 9. How will the project position(s) be filled? a. Competitive examination(s) b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)? c. Direct appointment of: 1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current job 2. Non-County employee Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26029 to add one (1) full-time Clerical Supervisor (JWHF) position at salary plan and grade K6X-1290 ($5,090 - $6,500) and cancel two (2) vacant Clerk-Senior Level (JWXC) positions #9659 and #8187 at salary plan and grade 3RX-1033 ($3,946 - $5,040) in the Health Services department. (Represented) FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this action will result in an annual cost saving of approximately $83,205 with $32,267 in pension cost already included. Cost savings will be in the Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: The Health Information Management unit is HIPAA enforced and patient-driven delivery program that handles inpatient, outpatient, and detention Release of Information (ROI) of Protected Health Information (PHI). The unit must provide a safe and secure service of delivering and releasing PHI and Electronic Protected Health Information (ePHI) to ensure information exchange for clinical, legal, financial/billing purposes, and personal needs are met in a timely manner. Due to an increased volume of record requests from the unit, the Clerical Supervisor will provide guidance, support, and training to their subordinates, update clerical processes, review and approve timesheets, and reduce the span of control to allow better supervision of the unit. This will allow the manager(s) to focus their time on higher and more complex responsibilities that the County is encountering. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this request is not approved, there will not be sufficient staff to provide oversight to the growing Medical Records team. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Sihina Tatum, (925) 431-2535 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Sihina Tatum, Jo-Anne Linares, Kathi Caudel, Maghan Combs, Linh Huynh, Lauren Jimenez C. 27 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Add One Clerical Supervisor Position and Cancel Two Clerk-Senior Level Positions in the Health Services Department AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 No. 26029 HSD MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 26029 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 26029 DATE 8/31/2022 Department No./ Department Health Services Budget Unit No. 0540 Org No. 6510 Agenc y No. A18 Action Requested: Add one (1) Clerical Supervisor (JWHF) position and cancel two (2) Clerk -Senior Level (JWXC) positions in the Health Services department. (Represented) Proposed Effective Date: 10/21/2022 Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) associated with request: Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time): Total annual cost ($83,205.22) Net County Cost $0.00 Total this FY ($69,337.68) N.C.C. this FY ($0.00) SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT 100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Lauren Ludwig ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Sarah Kennard for 9/13/2022 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE Exempt from Human Resources review under delegated authority Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 9/14/22 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Enid Mendoza Other: Approve as recommended by the department. ___________________________________ (for) County A dministrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: Monica Nino, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator DATE BY APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTES A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows: P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Date No. 1. Project Positions Requested: 2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s) 3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds) 4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year-to-year basis? Please explain. 5. Project Annual Cost a. Salary & Benefits Costs: b. Support Costs: (services, supplies, equipment, etc.) c. Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund: 6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of: a. potential future costs d. political implications b. legal implications e. organizational implications c. financial implications 7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have considered. Indicate why these alternatives were not chosen. 8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resources Department, which will forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted 9. How will the project position(s) be filled? a. Competitive examination(s) b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)? c. Direct appointment of: 1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current job 2. Non-County employee Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26028 to add one (1) Public Health Program Specialist II (VBND) position at salary plan and grade ZA5-1711 ($7,742 - $9,411) (Org 5762), one (1) Medical Interpreter (VMVD) position at salary plan and grade TC5-1275 ($5,028- $6,112) (Org 5815), and one (1) Buyer II (STTA) position at salary plan and grade ZB5-1525 ($6,440 - $7,828) (Org 5835) in the Health Services Department. (Represented) FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this action will result in an overall annual increase of $479,785 with $108,664 in pension cost included. These positions will be fully offset by 40% Birth and Death Certificate Program Revenue (Public Health Program Specialist II), 33% Public Health Workforce Development Grant (Buyer II), and 27% Refugee Health Assessment Program Grant (Medical Interpreter). BACKGROUND: Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) is requesting to add one Public Health Program Specialist II position within the Public Health Division. CCHS operates the State mandated Vital Registration Office (VR). The main function of VR office is to register all births and deaths that occur within Contra Costa County. The office receives most of their revenue from birth and death certificates, generating about $1.8M/year with a program cost of $600,000, leaving an annual net income of about $1.2M. The office is operated by County staff and is self-funded. Adding the Public Health Program Specialist II position would be at no cost to the General Fund. This position will responsible for hiring, training, directing, and supervising subordinate staff. CCHS receives funding to provide refugee health screenings and to establish care for all qualified refugees, asylees, parolees, and victims of trafficking who settle in the County. Currently, these individuals and families are mostly Dari, Farsi or Pashto speaking Afghan refugees who require medical interpretation for their clinic and hospital visits and other support services provided by CCHS. Recently, the number of refugees has risen from about 50 - 80 per year to more than 100 per month resulting in a greater need for interpretation services for this population. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Larita Clow, (925) 957-5244 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Larita Clow, Jo-Anne Linares, Sherry Martija, Dora Regalado, Viviana Garcia, Christine Austin C. 28 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Add three positions in the Public Health Division within Health Services BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Nationally, the number of refugees has also increased with a growing need for these languages on the Health Care Interpreter Network (HCIN) and their contracted language provider, Language Line Services (LLS). The Public Health Division is requesting to add one Medical Interpreter that will provide interpretation services to Afghan refugees. The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) awarded CCHS $1,910,858 on August 31, 2021, to support the public health workforce development. Funding supports positions to establish, expand, train, and sustain the public health workforce to better respond to Covid-19 and other public health crisis in the future. The Buyer II position will be embedded into the Public Health department to strengthen the infrastructure and to establish a more responsive and scalable department. It will help develop a division wide purchasing structure needed to better respond to future Public Health emergencies. The position will help meet the CCHS prepared budget and work plan that was approved by CDPH in October 2021. In order to meet the deliverables of the funding, the department is requesting to add one Buyer II position. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this request is not approved, these positions will not be added to the Public Health Division and will negatively affect program activities. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 No. 26028 HSD MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 26028 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 26028 DATE 8/30/2022 Department No./ Department Health Services Budget Unit No. 0450 Org No. Various Agency No. 18 Action Requested: Add one (1) Public Health Program Specialist II (VBND) (Org 5762), one (1) Medical Interpreter (VMVD) (Org 5815), and one (1) Buyer II (STTA) (Org 5835) position in the Health Services Department . (Represented) Proposed Effective Date: 9/21/2022 Classification Quest ionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No Total One-Time Costs (non-salary ) associated with request: Estimated total cost adjus tment (salary / benefits / one time): Total annual cost $479,785.00 Net County Cost $0.00 Total this FY $399,821.00 N.C.C. this FY $0.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSE T ADJUSTMENT: (33% Public Health Workforce Development Grant, 40% Birth and Death Certific ate Program Revenue, and 27% Refugee Health Assessment Program Grant) Department must initiate necessary adjustment and s ubmit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Larita Clow ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RE SOURCES DEPARTMENT Sarah Kennard for 9/13/2022 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DE PARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE Exempt from Human Resources review under delegated authority. Am end Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 9/14/2022 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Res ources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Enid Mendoza Other: Approve as recommended by the department. ___________________________________ (for) County Administrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: Monica Nino, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator DATE BY APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTE S A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows: P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Dat e _______ No. xxxxx 1. Project Positions Requested: 2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s ) 3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds) 4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date Is funding fo r a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year-to-year basis? Please explain. 5. Project Annual Cost a. Salary & Benefit s Costs : b. Support Cost s : (services, supplies, equipment, etc.) c . Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund: 6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of: a. potential future costs d. political implications b. legal implications e. organizational implications c . financial implications 7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have cons idered. Indicate why these alternatives were not chosen. 8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resources Department, which will forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted 9. How will the project position(s) be filled? a. Competitive examinat ion(s) b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)? c. Direct appointment of: 1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current j ob 2. Non-County employ ee Provide a justification if filling position(s ) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26027 to add one (1) Departmental Human Resources Analyst II (ARTA) position at salary plan and grade B85-1631 ($7,433 - $10,982) (Unrepresented), one (1) Administrative Aide (AP7A) position at salary plan and grade B85-0972 ($3,726 - $5,781) (Unrepresented), one (1) Infection Prevention and Control Manager (VWSF) position at salary plan and grade ZZX-1004 ($13,262 - $16,562), two (2) Disease Intervention Technician (V7WB) positions at salary plan and grade TC5-1248 ($5,073 - $6,166), three (3) Clerk - Senior Level (JWXC) positions at salary plan and grade 3RX-1033 ($3,946 - $5,040), two (2) Public Health Program Specialist I (VBSD) positions at salary plan and grade ZA5-1602 ($6,950 - $8,448), two (2) Administrative Services Assistant II (APVA) positions at salary plan and grade ZB5-1475 ($6,129 - $7,450), one (1) Health Services Systems Analyst II (LBVC) position at salary plan and grade ZB5-1784 ($8,323 - $11,153), one (1) Planner and Evaluator - Level B (VCXD) position at salary plan and grade ZB2-1323 ($5,432 - $8,901), and one (1) Public Health Program Specialist II (VBND) position at salary plan and grade ZA5-1711 ($7,742 - $9,411) in the Health Services Department. (Represented) FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this action will result in an annual salary and benefit cost increase of approximately $2,495,390 with $567,916 in pension cost included. These positions will be fully offset by 100% Public Health State Funding. BACKGROUND: The Department is requesting these positions to permanently staff and strengthen the Public Health Division's Quality and Accreditation programs, and Communicable Disease and Emergency Response programs. The future plan of Public Health funding includes replacing time limited funding for existing positions covered by COVID related grants; replacing project positions with permanent positions for long term sustainability; and replacing time limited funding for existing positions covered by Public Health Workforce Development, other Public Health grants, and permanent positions that need on-going funding. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Rachael Birch, (925) 381-8048 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Larita Clow, Jo-Anne Linares, Sherry Martija, Dora Regalado, Viviana Garcia, Christine Austin, Rachael Birch C. 29 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Add 15 positions in the Health Services Department BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) is requesting to add the following 8 positions within the Public Health Division: -One (1) Infection Prevention and Control Manager position -Two (2) Disease Intervention Technician positions -Two (2) Clerk – Senior Level positions -Two (2) Public Health Program Specialist I positions -One (1) Administrative Aide position These positions will be assigned to the Public Health Communicable Disease and Emergency Response programs to increase the capacity of the units in order to effectively respond to current and future disease reporting, tracking and mitigation. The current disease workforce includes project and temporary positions supported with Covid specific and time-limited funding. The future of Public Health funding will be leveraged to create permanent positions to support on-going disease response workload increases. The department is also requesting the addition of the following two positions for the Personnel Unit to aid in the recruitment and hiring of the expanding public health workforce and ongoing needs: -One (1) Clerk – Senior Level position -One (1) Departmental Human Resources Analyst II position The two (2) Administrative Services Assistant II positions requested will support programs in the monitoring of contracts and grants. They will support programs with complex grants and reporting requirements, alleviating the administrative burden on the program managers. The Public Health division is experiencing a growth in grant opportunities and has been unable to support their Finance division at an adequate level. These positions will ensure that programs are meeting internal and external deadlines and tracking expenditures/invoices in a more timely manner. Additionally, the department is requesting to add three positions to assist the Public Health Quality unit with the Public Health Accreditation process, a multi-year initiate to strengthen the public health practice by champion performance improvement, strong infrastructure, and innovation. The accreditation process requires departments to develop a quality plan, community health assessment, division-wide improvement strategies, workforce development plan and other initiatives. The following three positions will support in all aspects of this process: -One (1) Health Services Systems Analyst II position (PH equity-focused data analysis in BI) -One (1) Planner and Evaluator - Level B position -One (1) Public Health Program Specialist II position CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this request is not approved, these positions will not be properly allocated to the Public Health division and other departmental divisions providing various administrative supports, and will negatively affect Public Health's future plan of funding and program activities. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 No. 26027 HSD MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 26027 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 26027 DATE 8/30/2022 Department No./ Department Health Services Budget Unit No. 0450 Org No. 5898 Agency No. 18 Action Requested: Add one (1) Departmental Human Resources Analy st II (ARTA) position (Unrepresented), one (1) Administrative Aide (AP7A) position (Unrepresented), one (1) Infection Prevention and Control Manager (VWSF), two (2) Disease Intervention Technician (V7WB) positions , three (3) Clerk - Senior Level (JWXC) pos itions , two (2) Public Health Program Specialist I (VBSD) positions , two (2) Administrative Services Assistant II (APVA) positions , one (1) Health Services Systems Analyst II (LBVC) position, one (1) Planner and Evaluator - Level B (VCXD) position, and one (1) Public Health Program Specialist II (VBND) position in the Health Services Department. (Represented) Proposed Effective Date: 9/14/2022 Classification Quest ionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department ’s budget: Yes No Total One-Time Costs (non-salary ) associated with request: $0.00 Estimated total cost adjus tment (salary / benefits / one tim e): Total annual cost $2,495,390.00 Net County Cost $0.00 Total this FY $2,079,492.00 N.C.C. this FY $0.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSE T ADJUSTMENT: 100% Public Health State Funding Department must initiate necessary adjustment and s ubmit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Larita Clow ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RE SOURCES DEPARTMENT Sarah Kennard for 9/13/2022 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE Exempt from Human Res ources review under delegated authority. Am end Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RE COMMENDATION: DATE 9/15/2022 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Res ources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Enid Mendoza Other: Approve as recommended by the department. ___________________________________ (for) County Administrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: Monica Nino, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator DATE BY APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTE S A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows: P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Dat e _______ No. xxxxx 1. Project Positions Requested: 2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s ) 3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Pro ject or SDSS Funds) 4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date Is funding fo r a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year-to-year basis? Please explain. 5. Project Annual Cost a. Salary & Benefit s Costs : b. Support Cost s : (services, supplies, equipment, etc.) c . Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund: 6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of: a. potential future costs d. political implications b. legal implications e. organizational implications c . financial implications 7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have cons idered. Indicate why these alternatives were not chosen. 8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an upd ated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resources Department, which will forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted 9. How will the project position(s) be filled? a. Competitive examinat ion(s) b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)? c . Direct appointment of: 1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current j ob 2. Non-County employ ee Provide a just ification if filling position(s ) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26031 reallocating Human Resources Analyst (AGTF) (unrepresented) and the Employee Benefits Analyst (AGVG) (unrepresented) classifications on the salary schedule at salary plan and grade B85 1631 ($7,433 - $10,982); all incumbent employees in these classes remain in the step that equals current compensation rate, as recommended by the Director of Human Resources. FISCAL IMPACT: This action will result in an annual salary and benefit cost increase totaling approximately $151,315, which includes $28.793 in pension cost. There is no fiscal impact in the current fiscal year 2022-23. (100% General Fund) BACKGROUND: The Human Resources Analyst (HR Analyst) classification supports county departments in conducting job analysis, recruitment, developing and administering pre-employment tests, performance test administration, conducting classification and compensation analysis, desk audits, and classification revisions. Seven HR Analysts provide oversight and support to all 27 County departments. The Employee Benefits Analyst role falls into two categories. One supports the county APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Ann Elliott, (925) 655-2147 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Sylvia WongTam C. 30 To:Board of Supervisors From:Ann Elliott, Human Resources Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Reallocate salaries for various Human Resources Classifications BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) benefits plans, such as medical, dental, vision, life insurance through annual open enrollment, conducting RFPs, contract administration, coordination of benefits events and monthly facilitation of HR trust funds as well as providing staff support to the Joint Labor Management Benefits Committee (JLMBC) and the 457 Deferred Compensation Committee. The second Benefits Analyst works with the ADA Program Manager and the Leave Program Manager to support and train all departments in maintaining compliance with applicable state and federal laws for these program. Since June 2021, Human Resources has conducted 6 recruitments to fill vacancies. While some positions have been filled through those recruitments, there are now more vacancies than when the first recruitment opened. Retention has been an ongoing challenge. A salary study was conducted and it was found that Human Resource Analyst and Employee Benefits Analyst classifications were below market. By bringing the salary for these classifications to market, it allows the County to offer a salary level in line with our comparator agencies. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Human Resources will continue to experience significant difficulty in recruiting and retaining staff needed to support all county departments in conducting job analysis, recruitments, developing and administering pre-employment test, performance test administration, conducting classification and compensation analysis, desk audits, and classification revisions. Without adequate staffing in those roles, the Human Resources department will not have adequate support to provide all County agencies. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 26031 Air 50957 Reallocate Salaries In HR MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 26031 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 26031 DATE 9/7/2022 Department No./ Department Human Resources Budget Unit No. Org No. Agency No. Action Requested: Reallocat e the salary of the Human Resources Analyst (AGTF) and the Employee Benefits Analyst (AGVG) on the salary schedule at salary plan and grade B85 1631 ($7,433 - $10,982) and leave all employees in the step that equals current compensation rate Proposed Effective Date: 10/1/2022 Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) as sociated with request: Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time): Total annual cost $151,315.00 Net County Cost $151,315.00 Total this FY $0.00 N.C.C. this FY $0.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Gladys Scott Reid ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE 9/7/2022 Reallocate the salary of the Human Resources Analyst (AGTF) and the Employee Benefits Analyst (AGVG) on the salary schedule at salary plan and grade B85 1631 ($7,433 - $10,982) and leave all employees in the step that equals current compensation rate Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. 10/1/2022(Date) Gladys Scott Reid 9/7/2022 ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 9/15/2022 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Huma n Resources Jason Chan Other: ____________________________________________ ___________________________________ (for) County Administrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: Monica Nino, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator DATE BY APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTES A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows: P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Date No. 1. Project Positions Requested: 2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s) 3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds) 4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year -to-year basis? Please explain. 5. Project Annual Cost a. Salary & Benefits Costs: b. Support Costs: (services, supplies, equipment, etc.) c. Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund: 6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of: a. potential future costs d. political implications b. legal implications e. organizational implications c. financial implications 7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have considered. Indicate why these alternatives were not chosen. 8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resource s Department, which will forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted 9. How will the project position(s) be filled? a. Competitive examination(s) b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)? c. Direct appointment of: 1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current job 2. Non-County employee Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/322 authorizing the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to apply for and execute a contract to accept State of California (State) Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funds in an amount not to exceed $557,286 for eligible activities to assist homeless individuals and families with services to regain permanent housing as approved by the State in accordance with all State ESG Program requirements and other applicable rules and laws. FISCAL IMPACT: No General Fund impact. All funds are provided to the County on a formula basis through the State of California. The State ESG funds are allocated to the State by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and then distributed to eligible local Administrative Entities. Contra Costa County is an eligible Administrative Entity. The estimated State ESG formula allocation to the County is $278,643; however, additional funds may become available from disencumbered expired ESG contracts. Application instructions from the State recommend listing an approved dollar amount that is at least double the formula allocation, or $557,286, in order to receive additional funds if they become available. The attached table of recommended State ESG allocations includes only the estimated amount. A portion of the funds are reserved for program administration in the County's Department of Conservation and Development. BACKGROUND: The State of California Department of Housing and Community Development allocates State Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funds to Continuum of Care (CoC) geographic areas. The CoC is a program through which the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development strives to end homelessness. The County’s Health, Housing and Homeless Services manages the CoC for Contra Costa. The County Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) is the Administrative Entity for the State ESG funds and is required to collaborate with the CoC. The Contra Costa Council on Homelessness (COH) is appointed by the Board of Supervisors and serves as the County’s CoC executive council. It provides advice and input on the operations of homeless services and program operations, and establishes the local process for applying for various programs including ESG. The ESG Program provides funds to activities that (1) engage homeless individuals and families who are living on the street, (2) improve the number and quality of emergency shelters for homeless individuals and families, (3) help operate shelters, (4) provide essential services to shelter residents, (5) rapidly re-house homeless individuals and families, and (6) prevent families/individuals from becoming homeless. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Jaclyn Tummings, 925-655-2886 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 31 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:2022/23 State of California Emergency Solutions Grant Program Funds BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) To apply for an allocation of State ESG funds, the County Board of Supervisors must approve a resolution authorizing and affirming the following: 1) that the funds will be used in a manner consistent with all applicable laws, regulations and contracts regarding the ESG Program; 2) that the County will receive ESG grant funds in an amount not to exceed $557,286; 3) that the ESG grant funds will be used for eligible activities; and 4) that the DCD Director or Assistant Deputy Director are authorized to execute a Standard Agreement for ESG funds and related documents. The County has participated in the State ESG Program since 2016. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County will not be able to receive State ESG funds to support CoC geographic areas. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: Programs and activities funded with State ESG support one or more of the following children's outcomes: Children Ready for and Succeeding in School1. Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive Adulthood2. Families that are Economically Self Sufficient3. Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing4. Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families5. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2022/322 2022/23 State ESG Recommendations MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2022/322 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 09/20/2022 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2022/322 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR FUNDING AND THE EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO FROM THE 2022-23 FUNDING YEAR OF THE STATE ESG PROGRAM, CONTINUUM OF CARE ALLOCATION NOFA. A NECESSARY QUORUM AND MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA ("APPLICANT") HEREBY CONSENT TO, ADOP AND RATIFY THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTIONS: WHEREAS the State of California (the "State"), Department of Housing and Community Development ("Department") issued a Notice of Funding Availability ("NOFA") for the Continuum of Care Allocation dated June 13, 2022 under the Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Program (Program, or ESG Program); and WHEREAS Applicant is an approved state ESG Administrative Entity. 1. Applicant is an approved Applicant by their Continuum of Care under the Continuum of Care Allocation and is hereby authorized and directed to receive an ESG grant, in an amount not to exceed $557,286 in accordance with all applicable rules and laws. 2. The Department may approve funding allocations for the ESG Program, subject to the terms and conditions of the NOFA, Program regulations, and the Standard Agreement. The Applicant acknowledges compliance with all state and federal public participation requirements in the development of its applications. 3. If applicant receives a grant of ESG funds from the Department pursuant to the above referenced ESG NOFA, it represents and certifies that it will use all such funds in a manner consistent and in compliance with all applicable state and federal statues, rules, regulations, and laws, including without limitation all rules and laws regarding the ESG Program, as well as any and all other contracts Applicant may have with the Department. 4.The Applicant hereby authorizes and directs the Director-Department of Conservation and Development, or designee, to execute and deliver all applications and act on the Applicant's behalf in all matters pertaining to all such applications. 5. If the application is approved, the Director-Department of Conservation and Development, or designee, is authorized to enter into, execute and deliver the grant agreement (i.e., Standard Agreement) and any and all subsequent amendments thereto with the State of California for the purposes of the grant. 6. If an application is approved, the Director-Department of Conservation and Development, or designee, is authorized to sign and submit Funds Requests and all required reporting forms and other documentation as may be required by the State of California from time to time in connection with the grant. Contact: Jaclyn Tummings, 925-655-2886 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: State Emergency Solutions Grant Program Staff Recommendations 2022/23 Applicant Name Project Name Project Objective/Description Core Activity CA-ESG Requested Emergency Shelter Street Outreach Rapid Rehousing Homeless Prevention HMIS (max. 10% of total award) Admin.Total Award (CA-ESG) SHELTER, Inc. 1333 Willow Pass Rd #206 Concord, CA 94520 Rapid Rehousing & Homeless Prevention Program Program rapidly re-houses homeless households and prevents homelessness for households at immediate risk of homelessness.Services include case management and financial assistance (e.g.,move-in costs,rental subsidies).Increased focus to increase the level of services to quickly rapidly rehouse to a permanent home homeless households (e.g.housing search,more intensive case management and increased rent assistance as needed). Rapid Rehousing $130,004 $110,535 $0 $110,535 SHELTER, Inc. 1333 Willow Pass Rd #206 Concord, CA 94520 Mountain View Family Emergency Shelter Open 24 hours a day and 7 days a week, Mountain View Emergency Family Shelter is a year-round emergency shelter serving homeless families with children. The program provides homeless families with a safe place to sleep and meals in conjunction with critical on-site services such as education, employment services and counseling aimed at developing stability and self-sufficiency. Emergency Shelter Service $75,000 $35,607 $35,607 Contra Costa County Health Services 1350 Arnold Drive, Ste 202 Martinez, CA 94553 CCHS CORE OUTREACH PROGRAM Health Services CORE Outreach Program will provide daytime outreach in small multidisciplinary teams that will work collaboratively to engage and stabilize homeless individuals living outside and deliver health and basic need services and aid in obtaining interim and permanent housing. Street Outreach $99,003 $63,667 $63,667 STAND! For Families Free of Violence 1410 Danzig Plaza Concord, CA 94520 Emergency Shelter STAND!’s Emergency Shelter can accommodate up to 24 adult survivors and their children who are fleeing life threatening violent relationships for up to 3 months at no cost. As part of a continuum of care at STAND!, the Shelter provides clients with access to comprehensive supportive services, including food, clothing, social and legal advocacy, vocational assistance, child services, housing referrals, and evidence-based counseling – transitioning clients toward independence. Emergency Shelter Service $24,000 $26,539 $26,539 Trinity Center Walnut Creek 1924 Trinity Avenue Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Trinity Center Emergency Day Shelter Trinity Center Walnut Creek proposes to continue and expand its successful Emergency Day Shelter to meet the basic and recovery needs of homeless and very low-income persons. Our accessible program engages homeless persons who are resistant to services and advocates for their health, self-sufficiency, and permanent housing. By implementing an advocacy-oriented approach with very low barriers to services, Trinity Center supports the transition from homelessness to self-reliance. Emergency Shelter Service $40,000 $34,096 $34,096 Contra Costa County Conservation & Dev. Dept. 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Program Administration General Program Administrative costs include staff adminisrative work, training, equipment, and general operating expenses.Administration N/A $8,199 $8,199 $368,007 $96,242 $63,667 $110,535 $0 $0 $8,199 $278,643 Total CA-ESG Recommendation RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Agreement #28-528-63 with the County of Alameda, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $1,969,611 for coordination of essential services to Contra Costa County residents with HIV disease and their families, for the period from March 1, 2022 through February 28, 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this agreement will result in an amount payable to the County of up to $1,969,611 from the County of Alameda, which serves as the Grantee of federal funds under the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Modernization Act of 2009, Part A. No County match is required. BACKGROUND: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has designated the County of Alameda as “Grantee” for the purpose of administering the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Modernization Act of 2006, Part A, funds for coordination of essential services to Contra Costa County residents with HIV disease and their families. Contra Costa County has been receiving these grant funds since 1992. The goals of this program are to improve access to health care and to enhance health outcomes for people living with HIV. The Health Services Department uses a comprehensive medical case management model to reduce HIV-related health care costs by linking HIV-infected, low-income, and uninsured/underinsured individuals to appropriate health care services. HIV-positive individuals are assisted in accessing health care coverage and entitlements, making medical appointments, and in accessing necessary HIV medications. These individuals are also provided with home health attendant care and other services as appropriate, counseled in medication adherence, and offered referrals for food and nutritional assistance, psychosocial support services and other community resources. On June 22, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #28-528-61 with the County of Alameda Health Care Services Agency, as the fiscal agent for Ryan White CARE Act, Title I and Minority AIDS Initiative funds, to pay the County in an amount not to exceed $1,857,573 for coordination of services to Contra Costa residents with HIV disease and their families, for the period from March 1, 2021 through February 28, 2022. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Ori Tzieli, M.D., 925-608-5267 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: Marcy Wilhelm C. 32 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Agreement #28-528-63 with the County of Alameda BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) On November 23, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved Amendment Agreement #28-528-62 with County of Alameda Health Care Services Agency, to add $24,058 to a new total of $1,881,631 for additional coordination of essential services to Contra Costa County residents with HIV disease and their families, with no change in the term. This grant award request is late due to County not receiving the agreement from Alameda County until August 3, 2022. Approval of Agreement #28-528-63 will provide continued funding for coordination of services through February 28, 2023. This agreement includes mutual indemnification. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, the County will not receive funds to provide coordination of essential services to Contra Costa County residents with HIV disease and their families. RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/329 approving and authorizing the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an agreement with the State of California Health and Human Services Agency, Department of Community Services and Development, in an amount not to exceed $125,000 for Department of Energy, Weatherization Assistance Program services, for the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: County to receive funds in the amount of $125,000 from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, passed through the State of California Health and Human Services Agency, Department of Community Services and Development, all of which is budgeted in FY 2022-2023. No County cost (100% federal, AL # 81.042). BACKGROUND: County routinely receives funds from the State of California, Department of Community Services and Development, to manage the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) . Contra Costa County has received funding from the State of California, Department of Community Services and Development, for 25 years wherein the County provides energy bill APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: M. Wagoner, 925-680-4864 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 33 To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:2022-23 Department of Energy Weatherization Assistance Program BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) assistance payments and weatherization services to income-eligible Contra Costa County residents. The funding source is federal funding from the DOE passed through by the Department of Community Services and Development. County receives funds via the Employment & Human Services Department, which, in turn, partners with County's Department of Conservation and Development to provide direct services to clients through energy saving home improvements. The energy saving measures may provide homes with hot water heaters, furnaces, refrigerators, microwaves, doors, windows, florescent light bulbs, weather stripping, ceiling fans, and attic insulation. Homes receive a blower door test (a diagnostic tool to locate and correct air infiltration), and homes with gas appliances receive a combustion appliance safety test that checks for carbon monoxide gas leakage. Homes with gas appliances are provided with carbon monoxide alarms. The Program uses income-based eligibility as per the federal poverty guidelines for that program year. Once eligibility is determined, clients with no hot water, no heat, or are in danger of having their power shut off are served as emergencies. Services are then based on clients with the lowest income, highest energy burden, and those with one household member who is considered in the vulnerable population. During the last Fiscal Year, seven households received weatherization under DOE funds. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If not approved, eligible Contra Costa County residents will not be able to receive the weatherization assistance program to meet their energy needs. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The DOE WAP funding supports one of the community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card, Outcome #4: "Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing" through the provision of home energy assistance to keep households warm in winter and to increase household energy efficiency. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2022/329 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2022/329 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 09/20/2022 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2022/329 In the Matter of: 2022-23 Department of Energy Weatherization Assistance Program Whereas: The County routinely receives funds from the California Department of Community Services and Development to manage a Department of Energy Weatherization Assistance Program, and WHEREAS, Contra Costa County has received funding from the State Department of Community Services and Development for 25 years wherein the county provides energy bill assistance payments and weatherization services to county residents who are income-eligible to receive said services, and WHEREAS, The county receives the funds via the Employment & Human Services Department (EHSD); EHSD, in turn, partners with the County's Department of Conservation and Development to provide direct services to clients through energy saving home improvement, and WHEREAS, The energy saving measures may provide homes with hot water heaters, furnaces, refrigerators, microwaves, doors, windows, florescent light bulbs, weather stripping, ceiling fans, and attic insulation. Homes receive a blower door test (a diagnostic tool to locate and correct air infiltration), and homes with gas appliances receive a combustion appliance safety test that checks for carbon monoxide gas leakage, and WHEREAS, homes with gas appliances are provided with carbon monoxide alarms. The program uses income-based eligibility as per the federal poverty guidelines for that program year. Once eligibility is determined, clients with no hot water, no heat, or are in danger of having their power shut off are served as emergencies. Services are then based on clients with the lowest income, highest energy burden, and those with one household member who is considered in the vulnerable population, and Whereas: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has made available funding for WAP services through the State of California-Health and Human Services Agency, Department of Community Services and Development, State Agreement Number 22C-6003. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved: the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment & Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an agreement to accept funds in the amount of $125,000, from the State of California Health and Human Services Agency Department of Community Services and Development for the Department of Energy (DOE) Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) Agreement number 22C-6003 for the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023. Contact: M. Wagoner, 925-680-4864 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to apply for and accept grant funding from the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, Victim Services Branch, in an amount not to exceed $383,328 to bridge the gap in services addressing Elder Abuse for the period January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: County to apply for and receive an amount not to exceed $383,328 from the California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) to fund the Elder Abuse Prevention Project for a one year period (January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023). The first half of the grant (1/1/2023 – 6/30/2023) is already budgeted in FY 2022-23, while the second half (7/1/2023 – 12/31/2023) will be included in the budget for FY 2023-24. The project is supported through the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) Victim Assistance Formula Grant Program. The VOCA Victim Assistance Formula Grant Program of $383,328 (20VOCA =$191,664; 21VOCA=$191,664) requires a cash and/or in-kind match (20VOCA Match 20%=$47,916; 21VOCA Match 20%=47,916) equal to 20 percent of the total project cost (Pre-match Waiver of $479,160). The Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) will submit a Waiver APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: V. Kaplan, (925) 608-5052 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 34 To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:California Office of Emergency Services, Victim Services Branch Funding FISCAL IMPACT: (CONT'D) for the Match. If the waiver is not approved, there will be a match of $95,832 with Adult Protective Services (APS) funds. The VOCA amount being sought out is 100% Federal. AL#16.575. BACKGROUND: The goal of the Elder Abuse Prevention Project (EAPP) is to bridge the gap in services addressing Elder Abuse. EAPP is designed to provide direct services to elders in a coordinated manner. The program design takes into account approximately 5,200 annual Adult Protective Services (APS) reports of abuse, and focuses on the areas where direct service is most required: financial abuse, case management, and counseling. This focus will increase justice for, and safety of, elder residents of Contra Costa County. The EAPP also allows the County to utilize data from EmpowerDB to ensure that these cases are handled in a coordinated fashion. The EAPP provides a platform to raise awareness in the community by helping all providers and the community to better identify and respond to cases of elder abuse. This grant funding will be used to: 1. Continue identification and early intervention of financial abuse of the elderly in Contra Costa County; 2. Increase victim safety through linkages to mental health services and civil legal services; 3. Strengthen linkages and working relationships among agency partners working with APS clients to better meet the needs of vulnerable Elders at risk of abuse; and 4. Increase community awareness and understanding of Elder Abuse leading to better identification of cases by community members. Employment and Human Services Department's (EHSD) Aging and Adult Services will partner with Contra Costa Family Justice Center, District Attorney’s Office, and other contracted partners to deliver the elder abuse prevention and interventions outlined in the proposal application to Cal OES. Additional partners may be identified and added as needed. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without funding, the Adult Protection Services (APS) Division and its contracted partners will lessen their ability to respond to an increasing number of vulnerable elder adults facing financial abuse, interpersonal violence, neglect, and exploitation. RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/321 approving and authorizing the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to accept funding from, and execute an agreement with, the California Department of Aging, in an amount not to exceed $72,301 to provide Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act services for the period September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: County to receive funds in the amount of $72,301 from California Department of Aging, all of which is budgeted in FY 2022-2023. No County match (100% federal, AL# 93.071). BACKGROUND: The Employment and Human Services Department’s (EHSD) Area Agency on Aging (AAA) is a direct service provider of Health Insurance Counseling and Advocacy Program (HICAP), which helps older adults and persons in Contra Costa County navigate Medicare and other health insurance benefits. California Department of Aging has allocated the AAA $72,301 in federal MIPPA funding to help eligible beneficiaries reduce their Medicare premiums and deductibles. MIPPA also provides opportunities for HICAP staff and State-certified volunteer counselors to conduct outreach activities aimed at preventing disease and promoting wellness. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without MIPPA funding, EHSD would not be able to reach, inform, and assist eligible beneficiaries lower their Medicare premiums and deductibles, which disproportionately impacts low-income, limited English-proficient, and racial minority beneficiaries. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: M. Wagoner 925-608-4864 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 35 To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:California Department of Aging Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act Funding AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2022/321 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2022/321 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 09/20/2022 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2022/321 In The Matter Of: California Department of Aging, Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act Funding Whereas: Employment and Human Services provides Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act (MIPPA) services, through its Health Insurance Counseling and Advocacy Program (HICAP), and Whereas: California Department of Aging has made available funding for MIPPA services for the period September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2023. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved: the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approve and authorize the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to accept funding in an amount not to exceed $72,301 from the California Department of Aging (Agreement # MI-2223-07) to provide Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act (MIPPA) services for the period September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2023. Contact: M. Wagoner 925-608-4864 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: RECOMMENDATION(S): AADOPT Resolution No. 2022/320 approving and authoring the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to apply for and accept grant funding from the California Department of Aging in an amount not to exceed $1,222,039 for the Home and Community Based Services Senior Nutrition Infrastructure grant program for the period of July 1, 2022 through December 31, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: If the grant application is successful, the County will receive funding in the amount of $1,122,039 from the California Department of Aging, which is funded 100% by State funding from Home and Community Based Services – Senior Nutrition Infrastructure. No County match is required. The County to retain 10% maximum allowable portion of the grant, totaling $112,203 for administration. Appropriations and revenue adjustment for this new grant will be made during FY 2022-23. BACKGROUND: In 2021, California Legislature approved $40 million under the Mello-Grandlund Older Californians Act to support the capacity and infrastructure needs of senior nutrition APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: L. Pacheco (925) 608-4963 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 36 To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:California Department of Aging, Senior Nutrition Infrastructure Grant BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) programs throughout the state. The HCBS SNI grant resulted from this legislation, and County received notification from CDA that it had been approved for $1,122,039 in SNI grant to provide one-time support to help improve the capacity and infrastructure of senior nutrition programs in Contra Costa. The SNI grant funding period is July 1, 2022 through December 31, 2024. As the administrator the County’s Older Americans Act Title IIIC Elderly Nutrition Program, which includes home-delivered and congregate meal services, the Area Agency on Aging (AAA), a division in EHSD’s Aging and Adult Services Bureau, will apply for the SNI funding with CDA and oversee the vetting, procurement, management, and monitoring of projects funded under the SNI grant. SNI offers an opportunity for the AAA to enhance the viability and increase the capacity of its community-based senior nutrition program partners that serve the nutritional needs, provide critical well checks, and encourage social connections of eligible older persons, adults with disabilities, and family caregivers in Contra Costa. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without the SNI grant, the County forgoes this one-time opportunity for EHSD to improve and address the capacity and infrastructure needs of Contra Costa’s senior nutrition program. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2022/320 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2022/320 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 09/20/2022 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2022/320 In The Matter Of: California Department of Aging, Senior Nutrition Infrastructure Grant WHEREAS, in 2021, California Legislature approved $40 million under the Mello-Grandlund Older Californians Act to support the capacity and infrastructure needs of senior nutrition programs throughout the state, and WHEREAS, the HCBS SNI grant resulted from this legislation, and County received notification from CDA that it had been approved for $1,122,039 in SNI grant to provide one-time support to help improve the capacity and infrastructure of senior nutrition programs in Contra Costa, and WHEREAS, the SNI grant funding period is July 1, 2022 through December 31, 2024, and WHEREAS, as the administrator the County’s Older Americans Act Title IIIC Elderly Nutrition Program, which includes home-delivered and congregate meal services, the Area Agency on Aging (AAA), a division in EHSD’s Aging and Adult Services Bureau, will apply for the SNI funding with CDA and oversee the vetting, procurement, management, and monitoring of projects funded under the SNI grant, and WHEREAS, SNI offers an opportunity for the AAA to enhance the viability and increase the capacity of its community-based senior nutrition program partners that serve the nutritional needs, provide critical well checks, and encourage social connections of eligible older persons, adults with disabilities, and family caregivers in Contra Costa. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved: the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services (EHSD) Director, or designee, on behalf of the Area Agency on Aging division, to apply for and accept grant funding from the California Department of Aging (CDA) in an amount not to exceed $1,122,039 for the period July 1, 2022 through December 31, 2024 for the Home and Community Based Services Senior Nutrition Infrastructure (HCBS SNI) grant program. Contact: L. Pacheco (925) 608-4963 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Agricultural Commissioner, or designee, to execute an agreement with the California Department of Food and Agriculture to reimburse the County an amount not to exceed $329,785 to perform pest exclusion and high-risk pest inspection and enforcement activities for the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: This agreement will reimburse the County for expenses incurred not to exceed $329,785. (100% State funds) BACKGROUND: This agreement sets activity levels for Contra Costa County based on historical workloads and costs negotiated work plan to maintain optimal enforcement of quarantines to keep exotic and invasive pests out of California and Contra Costa County. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Megan Maddox, 925-608-6602 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 37 To:Board of Supervisors From:Matt Slattengren, Ag Commissioner/Weights & Measures Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:High Risk Pest Exclusion Program CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: A negative action will mean loss of revenue to the County and increased costs to support the inspection and enforcement activities mandated by the California Department of Food and Agriculture. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Agreement #29-828 with Public Health Institute, a nonprofit corporation, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $120,000 for the County’s Choosing Change program to provide a Substance Use Navigator to connect patients with Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) Treatment programs, for the period from September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: This agreement will result in funding of up to $120,000 from the Public Health Institute for Substance Use Navigator services. No County match is required. BACKGROUND: The County’s Choosing Change program (OUD treatment program) has received funding to support a substance use patient navigator to assist OUD patients to navigate treatment options when discharged from hospital settings. This program aims to continue supporting and initiating treatment of substance use disorders from Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC). In 2019, the CCRMC Emergency Department (ED) was selected as one of 50 California Bridge Program sites for the treatment of opioid use disorders. Physician champions from the ED and CCRMC have been identified to support staff and collaborate to improve workflows for patients being discharged. The County continues to enhance pathways to treating patients with OUD in any area of the hospital, with the goal to connect patients with OUD treatment options, lower the morbidity rate of these patients, and improve recovery rates. Approval of Agreement #29-828 will allow the County to receive funding for its Substance Use Navigator services for the period from September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2023. This contract includes indemnification to hold harmless the contractor and the original grantor, the State of California, for any claims arising out of the performance of this contract. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved the County will not receive funding for a Substance Use Navigator, which may put patients with OUD at more risk. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Ori Tzvieli, M.D., 925-608-5267 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: L Walker, M Wilhelm C. 38 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Agreement #29-828 with Public Health Institute RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Bay Alarm Company, in the amount of $67,000 for scholarships, classes, and recruitment for the Law Enforcement Training Center for the period January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2022, with the Sheriff’s Charities, Inc., serving as the fiscal agent. FISCAL IMPACT: $67,000 in revenue over two years; Budgeted. BACKGROUND: Bay Alarm provides scholarship funding in an effort to promote the education and training of local law enforcement recruits and officers. Additionally, Bay Alarm provides funding for advertisement along with event and media support for the recruitment of law enforcement officers. Board approval is requested due to changes in the County’s standard form contract indemnification language. The indemnification clause holds the County responsible for all legal costs incurred in the defense of a claim should the County choose to hire counsel separate from the indemnifying party. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Chrystine Robbins, 925-655-0008 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 39 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Sponsorship Funding BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) This agreement consists of $28,000 for the first year, and $29,000 for the second year. Bay Alarm will donate an additional $5,000 in each year of the two-year term to be utilized at the discretion of the Board of Directors of Sheriff’s Charities, Inc. for such philanthropic purposes as are set forth in its Articles of Incorporation CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Failure to approve this contract will negatively impact law enforcement efforts in the County. Bay Alarm sponsorship assist in advertising for recruits, promotes awareness of the local availability of courses and services, allows for the continued curriculum that would otherwise be eliminated, and provides scholarships to qualified candidates. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: None. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to apply for and accept grant funding from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Head Start, in an amount not to exceed $27,553,039 for Head Start and Early Head Start Program services for the period January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023. (100% Federal) FISCAL IMPACT: Total funding for calendar year 2023 is $27,553,039. Funding for the period January 1, 2023 through June 30, 2023 is included in the Department’s FY 2022-23 budget and funding for the July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 period will be included in the Department’s FY 23-24 Recommended Budget. The County, as Grantee, is required to generate a 25% non-federal match of the total grant budget. For 2023, the non-federal match is $6,888,260, which will be achieved through collaboration with State Child Development programs and the volunteer hours generated from Head Start parents and community partners. 100% Federal funds. No County Cost. CFDA #93.600. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Elaine Burres 608-4960 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 40 To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:2023 Head Start and Early Head Start Continuation Grant BACKGROUND: Head Start is a federal program that promotes the school readiness of children ages birth through five years old from low-income families by enhancing their cognitive, social and emotional development. The program design supports and nurtures healthy attachments between the child and their family, and provides quality child care, child development, and other services including, medical, mental health, and dental services. Head start provides a learning environment that supports children's growth in the following domains: language and literacy; cognition and general knowledge; physical development and health; social and emotional development; and approaches to learning. These services respond to each child and family's ethnic, cultural, and linguistic heritage. Children and families access these through centers or schools that children attend part or full-day. Children and families access these services through various service models, including centers that children attend half or full-day, and home visiting services. Contra Costa County applies annually to the U.S. Health and Human Services Department, Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Office of Head Start, as the Head Start grantee. The year four continuation applications for Head Start and Early Head Start were approved by the Board on September 7, 2021 (C.67) and (C.71). This approval is for year five of a five-year funding cycle. This year’s annual application includes newly identified goals and objectives for the program (see attached). On July 15, 2022, the Board received a Head Start and Early Head Start Program Performance Summary Report and on August 9, 2022 the Board authorized the Board Chair to approve a Quality Improvement Plan (item D.3). This 2023 continuation application provides an update on Quality Improvement Plan activities. The 2023 budget reflects an increase in personnel expenditures, as staff benefit from the Board approved 5% cost-of-living (COLA) increase in 2022 and second 5% increase in July 2023. Additionally, the ACF COLA also increased rates for the delegate and partnership agencies and are included in the budget for contractual expenditures. This year five application was reviewed and approved by the Head Start Policy Council on August 17, 2022 and is recommended by the Policy Council to the Board of Supervisors. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If not approved, the County will not receive funding to operate Head Start childcare centers. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The Head Start grant funding supports three of the community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card: 1) “Children Ready for and Succeeding in School, 3) “Families that are Economically Self-sufficient” and, 4) “Families that are Safe, Stable, and Nurturing" by offering comprehensive services, including high quality early childhood education, nutrition, and health services to children from low income families throughout Contra Costa County. ATTACHMENTS Head Start Funding Letter Grant Application Summary Office of Head Start | 330 C St., SW, 4th Floor, Washington DC 20201 | eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov July 22, 2022 Grant No. 09CH010862 Dear Head Start Grant Recipient: An application for funding for the upcoming budget period must be submitted by October 1, 2022. The following table reflects the annual funding and enrollment levels available to apply for: Funding Type Head Start Early Head Start Program Operations $18,095,272 $9,065,218 Training and Technical Assistance $197,344 $195,205 Total Funding $27,553,039 Program Head Start Early Head Start Federal Funded Enrollment 1,351 573 Period of Funding: 01/01/2023 - 12/31/2023 Application Submission Requirements The application must be prepared and submitted in accordance with the Head Start Grant Application Instructions with Guidance, Version 3 (Application Instructions) for a continuation application. It must be submitted on behalf of the Authorizing Official registered in the HSES. Incomplete applications will not be processed. Application Instructions are available on the home page of HSES. Please review the instructions carefully prior to preparing the application. Submission guidance can be found in the “Resources” section of the HSES. Please contact Chris Pflaumer, Head Start Program Specialist, at 415-437-8445 or chris.pflaumer@acf.hhs.gov or Caitlin Buffa, Grants Management Specialist, at 646-905-8138 or caitlin.buffa@acf.hhs.gov with questions regarding the Application Instructions. For assistance submitting the application in HSES, contact help@hsesinfo.org or 1-866-771- 4737. Funding is contingent upon the availability of federal funds and satisfactory performance under the terms and conditions of the current budget period. Program Improvement (One-Time) Requests Grant recipients encountering program improvement needs that cannot be supported by the agency budget are invited to apply for one-time funding. This funding must be applied for separately through the appropriate amendment in HSES. Program Improvement requests are prioritized and subject to funding availability. For questions regarding program improvement needs and requests, please contact the regional office. Thank you for your cooperation and timely submission of the grant application. Sincerely, /Cynthia Yao/ Cynthia Yao Regional Program Manager Office of Head Start Contra Costa County 2023 Head Start Grant Continuation Application EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Prepared by Employment & Human Services Department Page 1 1. FUNDING AGENCY. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Office of Head Start (OHS). 2. TERM. Contra Costa County is entering the fifth year of a five-year grant. A non- competitive application must be submitted each year. This is the application for the fifth year. 3. FUNDING MATCH. This grant requires a 25% non-federal match, which may be cash or in- kind contributions, fairly valued. Contra Costa County achieves this match with state early childhood education funding (cash) and parent volunteerism (in-kind). 4. SERVICE DELIVERED. With this grant, Contra Costa County serves the childcare and education needs of low-income families with children ages prenatal to five. Services include home visiting, quality childcare, child development, and other support services such as medical, mental health and dental. 5. BUDGET SUMMARY: Budget Categories: T/TA Basic Grant TOTAL Personnel - 7,109,993 7,109,993 Fringe Benefits - 4,405,695 4,405,695 Travel 23,950 - 23,950 Equipment - 100,000 100,000 Supplies - 520,000 520,000 Contractual 222,185 7,490,489 7,712,674 Construction - - - Other 146,414 6,169,193 6,315,607 Sub-Total of Direct Charges 392,549 25,795,371 26,187,920 Indirect Costs - 1,365,119 1,365,119 Total Federal Amount Requested 392,549 27,160,490 27,553,039 Non-Federal Share 98,137 6,790,122 6,888,260 Total Federal and Non- Federal 490,686 33,950,612 34,441,298 Contra Costa County 2023 Head Start Grant Continuation Application EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Prepared by Employment & Human Services Department Page 2 6. 2023 PROGRAM GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND EXPECTED OUTCOMES Goal 1: Ensure a culture that includes standardized practices for safe environments, safe transitions, Children’s Personal Rights, standards of conduct, child supervision, and classroom monitoring. Objectives 1. All Head Start staff, including but not limited to key administrative staff, site supervisors, teaching staff, and support staff, and including both grantee operated and delegate/partner operated sites, will receive annual reinforcement health and safety training and refresher trainings as needed if policy non-compliance is identified. 2. Continue to implement and monitor the effectiveness of the multi-layered ongoing monitoring approach launched during the 2022 Quality Improvement Plan (QIP) to ensure continued compliance across all service areas. 3. Enhance CLOUDS and other technology systems for staff and client communication and monitoring. This will include but not be limited to utilizing CLOUDS to support communication between kitchens in both grantee operated and delegate/partner operates sites, and each child development center, by a) documenting all child allergies or other food restriction, and b) kitchen posting of bi-weekly menus that are approved by each site for each child. 4. For this one year, and to solidify safety improvements, focus on center-based services instead of home-based childcare. Expected Outcome 1. A reduction in unusual incidents compared to 2022. Goal 2: Increase enrollment and attendance levels for grantee operated and delegate/partner operated centers as we continue to emerge from the impacts of the pandemic. Objectives 1. Coordinate with the Workforce Services Bureau of EHSD to a) share information with all relevant CalFresh family applicants and recipients about Head Start eligibility and enrollment opportunities including a) during application determination, b) continuing eligibility determination, c) semi-annual income reporting, d) outreach events. 2. Expand families partnerships to enhance family connection to centers and thus improve attendance by utilizing the Parent Family Community Engagement Framework. Contra Costa County 2023 Head Start Grant Continuation Application EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Prepared by Employment & Human Services Department Page 3 Expected Outcomes 1. Reach and maintain the ACF required enrollment rate. 2. Improve attendances rates compared to 2022. Goal 3: Adapt to the shift in community need for infant and toddler services and in light of the California implementation of Transitional Kindergarten. Objectives 1. Beginning in January, 2023, implement a plan developed in October – December 2022 to shift resources from Head Start to Early Head Start as articulated in the revised slots allocation included with this grant application. Expected Outcomes 1. Monthly reduction in the number of families with children ages 0-3 on the two county-wide waiting lists (maintained by us and by Coco Kids) compared to 2022. Goal 4: Implement innovative approaches to hiring, developing, and retaining a robust teaching, support and management staff for grantee operated and delegate/partner operated sites. Objectives 1. Conduct a class and compensation study for grantee administered and delegate/partner early childhood educator classifications and take appropriate action if salary increases seem merited, if they are financially feasible, and upon Board of Supervisors guidance. 2. For existing staff, continue to support the completion of the Early Childhood Education (ECE) Work Study program and transitions to higher-level classifications. 3. Teaching staff and all program staff will participate in hands-on training about mindfulness and how to incorporate it in daily self-care and daily classroom activities. 4. Managers and supervisors will receive the Psychological First Aid training to enhance skills in supporting the psychological safety of staff as part of our trauma- responsive initiatives. Expected Outcome 1. A reduction in vacancy rates, especially for teaching staff, compared to 2022. 2. A reduction in number of classrooms closed due to insufficient staffing, compared to 2022. Contra Costa County 2023 Head Start Grant Continuation Application EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Prepared by Employment & Human Services Department Page 4 Goal 5: Continue to execute, and then monitor the effectiveness of, the integration of administrative functions into the Employment & Human Services Department which was started with fiscal functions as part of the 2022 Quality Improvement Plan. Objectives 1. Finalize the full integration of facility management, purchasing, and information technology. Expected Outcome 1. A reduction in the number of internal control grantee and delegate/partners compared to 2022. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Health Services Department, to purchase 20 Amazon gift cards each with a $100 value totaling $2,000, 100 Target gift cards each with a $50 value and 75 each with a $5 value totaling $5,375, 75 Safeway gift cards each with a $25 value and 75 each with a $10 value totaling $2,625, the total amount not to exceed $10,000 from grant proceeds from several funding sources (listed below) for the Building Healthy Communities (BHC) Program from September 1, 2022 through December 31, 2023, as recommended by the Health Services Director. FISCAL IMPACT: This $10,000 expenditure will be entirely funded by 40% Kaiser Parks After Dark Grant, 30% Walk and Bike Leaders for Clean Air Grant, 20% Centers for Disease Control and Preventions' (CDC) Social Determinants of Health Accelerator Plan Grant, and 10% Transportation Development Act Grant. BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa County Health Services Building Healthy Communities Program received funding for Built Environment and Safe Routes to School efforts from various sources. The program provides small incentives and occasional light refreshments at meetings or events for community members and partners promoting physical activity, active transportation, bike safety education, and more. The Building Healthy Communities (BHC) program will distribute gift cards to support activities as allowed by various grants. The CDC’s Social Determinants of Health Grant - $100 x 20 gift cards will be distributed to residents from vulnerable communities who participate in planning meetings aimed at improving access to nutrition and physical activity in low-income neighborhoods. No resident will receive more than $100 per 2-hr meeting. Kaiser's grant supports the BHC Program, which will distribute gift cards as incentives to community residents who volunteer their time to participate in community input meetings, injury prevention events, focus groups, and surveys. The gift cards are intended to incentivize resident participation APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Luz Gomez, (925) 313-6813 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 41 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Gift Cards for Clients of the Building Healthy Communities Program BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) and support community engagement in BHC Program activities. The gift cards will aid BHC in providing injury prevention programs and services to equity priority communities across the County. The BHC program has a policy and proper controls for tracking and distributing gift cards. Records are maintained per internal record retention policy. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the grant funding for incentivizing resident participation would go unspent, and the funds would return to the funder. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: This recommendation supports the following children's outcomes: Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing and Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #25-094-1 with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions), a non-profit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $1,540,866 to provide housing support services including case management and housing navigation services for homeless individuals on probation for the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in budgeted expenditures up to $1,540,866 under this contract and will be funded 100% by Probation Department Funds as budgeted by the department for FY 2022-2023. BACKGROUND: This contract meets the social needs of the County’s population by providing housing support services to Contra Costa County homeless individuals on probation, which includes case management and housing navigation services. This contractor has been providing case management and housing navigation service to homeless individuals under this contract since July 2021. On September 7, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #25-094 with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Christy Saxton, 925-608-6700 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker, M Wilhelm C. 42 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #25-094-1 with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Hope Solutions), in an amount not to exceed $1,100,866 for the provision of housing support services including case management and housing navigation services for homeless individuals on probation for the period July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022. Approval of Contract #25-094-1 will allow the contractor to continue providing case management and housing navigation services to homeless individuals on probation through June 30, 2023.The division gained community approval to implement standardized program models to ensure consistency and accountability in the County's system of care. These program models were approved June 2, 2022 by the Council on Homelessness and the Continuum of Care. The contract renewal request is retroactive largely due to extensive program design and negotiations and limited staffing due to COVID-19 impacts. Though the terms of the previous contract have expired, the contractor is continuing the program in good faith while the contract renewal process is complete. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, homeless individuals on probation may remain homeless and will not have access to housing focused case management and housing services, including direct support. ATTACHMENTS RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Novation Contract #24-773-35 with Mountain Valley Child and Family Services, Inc., a non-profit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $1,400,000, to provide mental health services, case management and Therapeutic Behavioral Services (TBS) for Seriously Emotionally Disturbed (SED) youth and dependents, for the period from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, which includes a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2023, in an amount not to exceed $700,000. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in budgeted expenditures of up to $1,400,000 and will be funded by 50% Federal Medi-Cal ($700,000), 46% Mental Health Realignment($650,000) and 4% Measure X Fund ($50,000). (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: This contract meets the social needs of the County’s population by providing a comprehensive range of services and supports, including intensive individualized mental health services to Contra Costa dependents who are experiencing serious mental illness, likely to exhibit co-occurring disorders, and from underserved populations. The County on behalf of its Health Services Department has been contracting with Mountain Valley Child and Family Services, Inc. since July 1, 1994. On January 18, 2022, the Board of Supervisors approved Novation Contract #24-773-33 with Mountain Valley Child and Family Services, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,852,100, for the provision of TBS, and mental health services for SED youth and dependents, for the period from July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022, which included a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2022, in an amount not to exceed $926,050. On February 1, 2022, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract Amendment Agreement #24-773-34 to allow rate adjustments to provide cash flow and budget predictability and allow the services to continue with no change in the payment limit or term. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Suzanne Tavano, Ph.D., 925-957-5212 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Alaina Floyd, marcy.wilham C. 43 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Novation Contract #24-773-35 with Mountain Valley Child and Family Services, Inc. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Approval of Novation Contract #24-773-35 replaces the automatic extension under the prior contact and allows the contractor to continue providing comprehensive mental health services through June 30, 2023. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, transitional-aged youth in Contra Costa County will not have access to this contractor’s mental health services, which will lead to reduced levels of service to the community and potential placement in higher levels of care. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: This program supports the following Board of Supervisors’ community outcomes: “Children Ready For and Succeeding in School”; “Families that are Safe, Stable, and Nurturing”; and “Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families”. Expected program outcomes include an increase in positive social and emotional development as measured by the Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS). RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract Extension Agreement #72-154-1 with The Tides Center, a non-profit corporation, to extend the termination date from September 30, 2022 to March 31, 2023, with no change in the original contract payment limit of $500,000, to act as fiscal sponsor for Building Blocks for Kids (BBK) and support the development of the Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) Doula Program which provides community support through the prenatal, birth and postpartum services. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this extension amendment will not change in the original contract amount of $500,000. BACKGROUND: The CCHS Perinatal Equity Initiative has identified the community-based doula program as an intervention to address perinatal health disparities in the African American community. This intervention is specifically for African American community members to address the perinatal health disparities of prematurity, low birthweight, and fetal demises that occur within the population. This intervention targets these community members to offer emotional and practical supports during pregnancy to reduce stress, offer health education, labor and delivery support, and guidance to mom and baby during the immediate postpartum period. On October 13, 2020, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #72-154 with The Tides Center, in an amount not to exceed $500,000, to act as fiscal sponsor and support the development of the CCHS Doula Program which provides community support through the prenatal, birth and postpartum period for the period October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2022. Approval of Extension Agreement #72-154-1 will allow continuation of these services through March 31, 2023. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Ori Tzivieli, M.D., 925-608-5267 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: E Suisala , M Wilhelm C. 44 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Extension #72-154-1 with The Tides Center CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this extension is not approved, African American community members will not receive support through the prenatal, birth and postpartum period which will result in health disparities. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: This program supports the following Board of Supervisors’ community outcomes: “Families that are Safe, Stable, and Nurturing”; and “Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families”. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Health Services Department, to purchase 150 Starbucks gift cards each with a $10 value, totaling $1,500, 25 Jamba Juice gift cards each with a $10 value, totaling $250, and 25 Baskin Robins gift cards each with a $10 value, totaling $250, for a total value of gift cards not to exceed the amount of $2,000, as recommended by the Health Services Director to distribute to community members who participate in completing a population intercept survey from September 1, 2022 through March 31, 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: This $2,000 expenditure will be 100% funded by California Department of Public Health, Local Lead Agencies (CDPH, LLA) Grant proceeds for the Tobacco Prevention Program. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa Health Services' Tobacco Prevention Program received funds to provide incentives to community members that participate in surveys, public comment and additional Tobacco Prevention Coalition activities. These surveys will ask community members about their opinions on different tobacco related policies and the data will be shared with community members and policymakers to support educational campaigns. Funds to support this purchase are included as a line item in a grant from the California Tobacco Control Program. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the grant funding would go unspent, and the funds would return to the funder. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Mayra Lopez, (925) 313-6820 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 45 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Gift Cards for Participants of the Tobacco Prevention Program RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a blanket purchase order with Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Inc. in the amount of $435,000 for the purchase of reagents and supplies as needed for the Blood Bank Laboratory at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) for the period of September 1, 2022, to August 31, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this action will result in expenditures of up to $435,000 over the three-year period between September 1, 2022 to August 31, 2025, and will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. BACKGROUND: Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Inc., has the reagents and MTS cards specifically designed for use on Johnson & Johnson Vision blood bank analyzer, centrifuges, and incubators. The ID-MTS cards are propriety use for the Ortho-Clinical Diagnostic Ortho Vision Analyzer currently in use at CCRMC. Failing to use products such as the ID-MTS Gel cards will produce unreliable results and void the analyzer warranty. ID-MTS gel cards along with products from Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics have been implemented throughout the Blood Bank section to ensure the highest patient care delivery. On June 9, 2015, the Board of Supervisors approved agenda item C.122 to execute a blanket purchase order (#00485) with Ortho Clinical Diagnostic, Inc. in the amount of $398,786.85 to purchase blood bank reagents and supplies for the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and the Contra Costa Health Centers, for the period July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2020. On April 12, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved agenda item C.58 to execute a purchase order (#03926) with Ortho Clinic Diagnostics Inc., in the amount of $124,192 for the purchase of an Ortho Vision Analyzer used in the Clinical Laboratory at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) for the period July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2020. On March 31, 2020, the Board of Supervisors approved agenda item C.82 to APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Sam Ferrell, (925) 357-7483 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 46 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Purchase Order with Ortho-Clinical Diagnostic, Inc. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) execute an amendment to purchase order (#00485) with Orthho Clinical Diagnostic, Inc. to increase the payment limit by $140,000 to a new payment limit of $538,787 for the purchase of blood bank reagents and supplies for the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Contra Costa Health Centers, with no change in the original term of July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2020. Blood bank reagents and products are under Vizient GPO contract effective September 1, 2018, thru August 31, 2023, due to the propriety items strictly designed for the blood bank analyzers and equipment. Since no other reagents or MTS cards can be used with the equipment currently in the Blood Bank, a sole source justification was completed for the term through August 31, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this purchase order is not approved, the CCRMC Blood Bank Laboratory will not be able to perform critical and lifesaving testing without the requested reagents and supplies. Additionally, use of other products will void the warranty of the equipment and skew the data provided by the instruments resulting in inaccurate data. ATTACHMENTS RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE (1) the Purchasing Agent or designee, on behalf of the Health Services Department, to execute a purchase order with UpToDate, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $645,000 for the licensed content of drug-disease databases, and (2) the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute an amendment to the agreement with UpToDate, Inc. to renew the contract term to September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this action will result in expenditures of up to $645,000 over the three-year period between September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2025 and will be funded 100% by the Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) utilizes the multiple database platform to assist clinicians with drug utilization and associated costs through the application of advanced analytics. The license provides access to several databases to monitor the drug-disease interaction information service for ambulatory dispensing. The point of care references and embedded drug data solutions are trusted to help elevate quality, reduce costs, and improve patient outcomes. On May 5, 2015, the Board of Supervisors approved agenda item C.73 to execute a blanket purchase order with UpToDate, Inc. in the amount of $113,975 for a one-year subscription to the online database for the period June 1, 2015 through May 31, 2016. On June 13, 2017, the Board approved agenda item C.61 to execute a purchase order with UpToDate in an amount not to exceed $146,616 in the period from June 1, 2017 through May 31, 2018. On August 7, 2018, the Board approved agenda item C.90 to execute a Software Subscription Agreement with UpToDate, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $159,699 for the purchase of online medical information database site licenses for the period June 1, 2018 through May 31, 2019. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Palak Jain, (925) 391-1018 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 47 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Purchase Order with UpToDate, Inc. for Subscriber Self-Registration BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) On March 1, 2022, the Board approved agenda item C.46 to execute purchase order #24593 with UpToDate, Inc. in the amount of $202,601 for the licensed content of the drug-disease databases and execute an amendment to the agreement to extend the contract term to June 1, 2021 through May 31, 2022. UpToDate, Inc. was selected by the clinicians. It is the only system that integrates with EPIC and provides Continuing Medical Education credits to clinicians. There are no other sources that provide the same goods or services, therefore a sole source justification was completed. CCRMC has used UpToDate, Inc. since 2015. Due to the long relationship, stakeholders approved adjusting the term of the agreement from one year to three years. Approval of the recommended actions will allow the department to renew the contract term to September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this renewal is not approved, the clinical information necessary to enable coordination of care will be limited or not available, and patient care would be jeopardized. Clinicians would not receive Continuing Medical Education credits from UpToDate, Inc. and would need to attend additional training courses. ATTACHMENTS RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent or designee to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Steris Corporation, in an amount not to exceed $800,000 for the purchase of Steris agents, filters, solutions, and other medical items as needed, for the Operating Room at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC), for the period of September 1, 2022, through August 31, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this purchase order will result in expenditures of up to $800,000 over the three-year period between September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2025 and will be funded 100% by the Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) has been utilizing Steris steam and vaporized hydrogen peroxide autoclaves for the past twenty-six (26) years to disinfect surgical instruments, trays, scopes, medical devices, implants, etc. utilized for Perioperative Services, Labor & Delivery, Gastroenterology Lab, and Interventional Radiology. The Board approved the capital replacement of four Steris autoclaves as they had reached their end of life, and parts were no longer available to service these autoclaves. On July 12, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved agenda item C.99 to execute purchase order #04974 with Steris Corporation in the amount of $268,485.44. to replace two wall unit steam sterilizers. On October 23, 2018, the Board approved item C.50 a clarification of Board action item C.83 on August 7, 2018 to execute purchase order# 13861 with Steris Corporation in the amount of $266,522 to replace two vaporized hydrogen peroxide sterilizers. All four sterilizers were purchased under Vizient Group Purchasing Organization (GPO) contracts. In order to stay in compliance with Steris equipment warranties, it is recommended to continue purchasing proprietary Steris products for use with their autoclaves. Such products include Steris’s patented instrument cleaning chemistries for the removal of bio-burden, difficult to remove soils and protect surgical instruments from harm caused by repeated exposure to water, and hundreds of reprocessing cycles and Steris’s APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Gino Rogers, (925) 370-5343 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 48 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Purchase Order with Steris Corporation BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) sterility assurance monitoring products to provide the validation in sterilization processes required by regulatory agencies such as The Joint Commission, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, etc. designed to provide critical information about the sterilizer and the sterilization process. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this purchase order is not approved, CCRMC will not be able to operate their steam and vaporized hydrogen peroxide autoclaves. All surgical trays, surgical instruments, medical devices, scopes, implants etc. will need to be sent to an outside company offering sterilization services. Utilization of an outside service would create delays in the scheduling and performance of procedures without an additional investment to double or triple the current tray, instrument, medical device, scope inventory to address turnaround times for sterilization. ATTACHMENTS RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #23-596-4 with Emocha Mobile Health, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $160,200, to provide contractor-hosted services for its emocha video Directly Observed Therapy (DOT) Tuberculosis Monitoring Application for the period from May 1, 2022, through April 30, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $160,200 over a 5-year period and will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. (No rate increase). BACKGROUND: This contract meets the needs of the Health Services Department (HSD) by providing a contractor-hosted patient tuberculosis monitoring system. HSD began contracting with this contractor in May of 2016 for its tuberculosis monitoring and outreach software system, including equipment, system hosting, and support. Emocha was given a sole source contract for its proprietary software system. On June 7, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved contract #23-596 with Emocha Mobile Health, Inc., in the amount of $150,000 for the provision of its tuberculosis monitoring and outreach software through its contractor-hosted system, allowing HSD and patients to track laboratory measurements of illness via mobile device, for the period May 1, 2016, through April 30, 2019. In May 2017, the parties executed an administrative amendment under Contract Amendment Agreement #23-596-1 to correct a typographical error in the number of mobile devices and data plans from quantity 20 to 120, as listed in the payment provisions of the contract. On February 6, 2018, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract Amendment/Extension agreement #23-596-2, effective February 1, 2018, to increase the payment limit by $6,840 from $150,000 to a new payment limit of $156,480 for additional per-disease monitoring module software with no change in the original term of May 1, 2016, through April 30, APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Patrick Wilson, 925-335-8777 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 49 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #23-596-4 with Emocha Mobile Health, Inc. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) 2019. On March 12, 2019, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract Amendment/Extension agreement #23-596-3, effective March 1, 2019, to increase the payment limit by $93,960 from $156,480 to a new payment limit of $250,440 for additional contractor-hosted services related to tuberculosis monitoring and outreach software and to extend the term from April 30, 2019 to April 30, 2022. Approval of contract #23-596-4 allows the contractor to continue providing its contractor-hosted software and services, allowing HSD and patients to track laboratory measurements of an illness via mobile device, through April 30, 2027. The contract terms limit the contractor's liability to the amounts paid by the County during the twelve (12) month period immediately preceding the event giving rise to the contractor’s liability. The department is requesting retroactive approval of the contract, which was caused by a change in the product offering and the negotiation of new terms. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, the County will not be able to use the contractor-hosted tuberculosis monitoring software system, causing the need to correspond with each patient individually to track laboratory results and capture them manually. Converting back to a manual process would impede the process harming patient care and outcomes. ATTACHMENTS RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services Director, an amendment to Purchase Order #23886 with Clear Labs, Inc., to extend the term of September 1, 2021 through August 30, 2022 to September 1, 2021 through July 31, 2024, with no change to the payment limit of $2,000,000 to purchase testing reagents and kits for SARS-CoV-2 and other pandemic virus whole genome sequencing at the Contra Costa County Public Health Laboratory. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will result in expenditures of up to $2,000,000 over the three-year period between September 1, 2021 through July 31, 2024 and will be funded 100% by a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity (ELC) awarded grant, COVID-19 ELC Enhancing Detection Expansion (Strategy 2: Strengthen Laboratory Testing). BACKGROUND: Whole genome sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in patient specimens permits determination of circulating variants within Contra Costa County. Identifying variants allows Public Health and the Health Services Department to evaluate whether certain variants are associated with increased transmission or particular patient morbidity outcomes. On October 5, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved agenda item C.42 to execute purchase order #23886 with Clear Labs, Inc., in the amount of $2,000,000 for the period from September 1, 2021 through August 30, 2022 to purchase testing reagents and kits for SARS-CoV-2 and other pandemic virus whole genome sequencing. The Clear Labs Dx instrument was installed and in use at the Contra Costa Public Health Laboratory since March 2021. The instrument provides quick sequencing/variant identification for COVID-19. Clear Labs, Inc. provides the Clear Labs-specific reagents for the Clear Labs DX instrument, therefore a sole source justification was completed. This action will extend the term of the existing purchase order with Clear Labs, Inc. through July 31, 2024, which was previously approved in the amount of $2,000,000, for the purchase of next generation sequencing laboratory supplies APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Stephanie Trammell, (925) 370-5775 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 50 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment to Purchase Order with Clear Labs, Inc. (PO #23886) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) (collection kits, reagents, plastic consumables) purchased by the Contra Costa County Public Health Laboratory. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the Contra Costa Public Health Laboratory will not be able to maintain continuous and uninterrupted ordering of much needed laboratory supplies for genome sequencing. ATTACHMENTS RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Novation Contract #74-058-37 with Seneca Family of Agencies, a non-profit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $7,655,806, to provide school and community-based wraparound specialty mental health services and Therapeutic Behavioral Services (TBS) for Seriously Emotionally Disturbed (SED) children and their families in Contra Costa County for the period from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, which includes a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2023, in an amount not to exceed $3,827,903. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in budgeted expenditures of up to $7,655,806 for FY 2022-2023 and will be funded 50% by Federal Medi-Cal ($3,827,903), 41.5% Mental Health Realignment ($3,180,517), 4.7% Measure X Funds ($356,473), 2.4% Martinez Unified School District Grant ($181,538), .3% West Contra Costa Unified School District Grant ($20,000), and 1.2% Probation Department Wrap Match ($89,375) revenues. (Rate increase) BACKGROUND: This contract meets the social needs of the County’s population by providing community-based mental health services focusing on SED children, adolescents and their families which will result in positive social and emotional development at home, in the community and greater school success. The contractor has been providing these services since April 2000. On December 14, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved Novation Contract #74-058-34 with Seneca Family of Agencies, in an amount not to exceed $6,709,094 for the provision of school and community-based wraparound specialty mental health services and TBS for SED children and their families in Contra Costa County, for the period July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022, which included a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2022 in an amount not to exceed $3,354,547. On February 1, 2022, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract Amendment Agreement #74-058-35 to increase the per minute billing rates due to COVID-19, with no change to the original payment limit of $6,709,094 or term of July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022 and no change in the automatic extension amount through December 31, 2022 in an amount not to exceed $3,354,547. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Suzanne Tavano, Ph.D., 925-957-5201 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker, M Wilhelm C. 51 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Novation Contract #74-058-37 with Seneca Family of Agencies BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) On April 12, 2022, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract Amendment Agreement #74-058-36 to increase the payment limit by $12,902 to a new payment limit of $6,721,996 with no change in the term July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022, and to increase the automatic extension amount by $6,451 to a new amount of $3,360,998 through December 31, 2022. Approval of Novation Contract #74-058-37 replaces the automatic extension under the prior contract and allows the contractor to continue providing specialty mental health services through June 30, 2023. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, there will be fewer mental health services available for SED children in Contra Costa County as the county solicits and engages an alternative contractor. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: This Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic, and Treatment (EPSDT) program supports the following Board of Supervisors’ community outcomes: “Children Ready for and Succeeding in School”; “Families that are Safe, Stable, and Nurturing”; and “Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families”. Expected program outcomes include an increase in positive social and emotional development as measured by the Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS). RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Public Works Department, a blanket purchase order with Ray Morgan Company in the amount of $450,000, for a Canon Vario Print 6180TP Press for County departments' printing needs, for the period October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of printing is initially charged to the General Fund but recovered through charges to County departments. Print and Mail Services is a zero net County cost operation. (100% User Departments) BACKGROUND: The Canon Vario Print 6180TP press will replace the expired lease of the Canon Vario Print 6160. Ray Morgan Company was selected after the Public Works Print & Mail division performed a solicitation of vendors that could service the equipment. Ray Morgan Company was chosen because they are largest local independent Canon Dealer with extensive local service staff and parts supplies. Ray Morgan will lock the lease rate and usage charge for the term of the lease. This press is the only machine on the market that prints both sides of the sheet at the same time, which saves time and money. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Dale Morseman, 925-655-4500 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 52 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE a Blanket Purchase Order with Ray Morgan Company for the Lease of a Canon Vario Print 6180TP Press. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this request is not approved, the cost of printing may go up. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #73-736 with Mesa Laboratories, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $524,306, to provide Mesa Lab’s hosted temperature monitoring system including software, services, maintenance and support to Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) for equipment, room, temperature and humidity monitoring for the period from September 20, 2022 through September 19, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $524,306 over a 3-year period and will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: This contract meets the needs of the County by providing a temperature and humidity monitoring system, with viewpoint sensors used throughout the County to monitor laboratory equipment, all medication refrigerators, and freezers, as well as monitoring rooms that store medication. Agencies such as the California Board of Pharmacy, the Joint Commission (Hospital Accreditation), and California Department of Public Health require continuous digital temperature logging for refrigeration, laboratory storage, and room temperatures where medications are stored. The County uses this system to comply with CCRMC’s Vaccine for Children program, and it is a pharmacy requirement for the storage of medications. In 2018, CCRMC began using this vendor, chosen as an industry standard, as they continue the upgrade of their proprietary systems and equipment to meet the ever-changing requirements of the various agencies listed above. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Jaspreet Benepal, (925) 370-5100 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 53 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #76-736 with Mesa Laboratories, Inc. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Approval of this contract #76-736 allows the contractor to provide services through September 19, 2025. Under this contract, the contractor’s liability under the contract is limited to the amounts paid by the County in the 12 months preceding the event giving rise to an applicable claim. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, CCRMC will not have a system in place that monitors the temperature and humidity in rooms and other equipment. This would have detrimental effects on patient care. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-997-6 with S/T Health Group Consulting, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $300,000, to provide pharmacy benefit manager audit services at Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP), for the period October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in annual expenditures of up to $300,000 and will be funded as budgeted by the department in FY 2022-23, by 100% CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: This contract meets the social needs of the County’s responsibilities to the County population by providing 340B pharmacy audits with County contracted pharmacies in order to recover possible monies overpaid due to errors, to confirm formulary guidelines and to verify pricing agreements are followed. The County has contracted with this contractor since 2015. In March 2020, the County Administrator approved and the Purchasing Services Manager executed Contract #27-997-3, with S/T Health Group Consulting, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $150,000 for the provision of performing 340B pharmacy audits with contracted pharmacies to confirm formulary guidelines and pricing agreements are being followed, and recover any monies that were overpaid due to errors for the period April 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021. In February 2021, the County Administrator approved and the Purchasing Services Manager executed Amendment/Extension Contract #27-997-4 with S/T Health Group Consulting, Inc., effective April 1, 2021, to extend the original term end date of the contract from March 31, 2021 to September 30, 2021 with no increase in the contract payment limit of $150,000, for the provision of 340B pharmacy audits with contracted pharmacies to confirm formulary guidelines and pricing agreements are being followed, and recover any monies that were overpaid due to errors. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Sharron A. Mackey, 925-313-6104 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Noel Garcia, Marcy Wilhelm C. 54 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #27-997-6 with S/T Health Group Consulting, Inc. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) On August 10, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved Amendment/Extension Contract #27-997-5 with S/T Health Group Consulting, Inc., effective September 30, 2021, to extend the term end date of the contract from September 30, 2021 to September 30, 2022, and increase the payment limit by $150,000 to a new payment limit of $300,000 to continue to provide 340B Program Audit services. Approval of Contract #27-997-6 will allow the contractor to continue providing 340B pharmacy audit services at CCHP through September 30, 2023. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, the contractor will not provide pharmacy audit services and the County 340B pricing agreements will not be reviewed for possible error. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Debri-Tech, Inc. (dba Rapid Recycle), in an amount not to exceed $2,000,000 to provide on-call trash and abandoned waste cleanup and removal services on various County roads for the Contra Costa County Watershed Program (CWP), for the period of October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2025, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: This project is funded by 100% Stormwater Utility Assessment Funds. BACKGROUND: The CWP is responsible for implementing measures to reduce trash/litter, abandoned waste, and other pollutants of concern found in local waterways in unincorporated Contra Costa County. As such, CWP requires routine and on-call assistance cleanup and removal services for trash/litter, debris, and abandoned waste items throughout unincorporated Contra Costa County, in order to remain in compliance with the Trash Load Reduction requirements in the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) Permit (MRP) from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region (Water Board). APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Melinda Harris, (925) 313-2037 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Allison Knapp, Deputy Public Works Director, Tim Jensen, Flood Control, Michele Mancuso, County Watershed Program, Melinda Harris, County Watershed Program, Catherine Windham, Flood Control C. 55 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Trash and Abandoned Waste Cleanup Services Contract with Debri-Tech (dba Rapid Recycle). Project No. 7517-WO7078 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without the approval of this contract by the Board of Supervisors, Contra Costa County will be out of compliance with the MRP from the Water Board. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Sheriff-Coroner, a purchase order amendment to PO# 017151 with Adamson Police Products to extend the termination date from October 1, 2022 to September 30, 2025, with no change to the payment limit of $450,000 for the purchase of tactical & protective gear and clothing and other products. FISCAL IMPACT: $450,000. 100% County General Fund; Budgeted. BACKGROUND: Adamson Police Products has a long history of providing quality products as well as exceptional customer service to the Office of the Sheriff. This purchase order ensures that the purchase of safety equipment, uniforms and accessories for the different divisions is integrated and coordinated by the Training Division to guarantee uniform pricing and inventory control. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Sheriff's Office will not have a vendor to purchase tactical & protective gear and clothing. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: No impact. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Heike Anderson, (925) 655-0023 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 , County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Heike Anderson, Alycia Rubio, Paul Reyes C. 56 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Purchase Order - Adamson Police Products RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a Consulting Services Agreement (contract) with David L. Gates & Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $500,000, to provide on-call landscape architect services for the period October 1, 2022, through September 30, 2025, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Special Revenue Funds. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department is involved in the development and review of landscape improvement projects throughout the County. As part of this regular work, consultant services are required to augment Public Works staff and provide special technical assistance on an on-call basis. After a solicitation process, David L. Gates & Associates, Inc., was one of three firms selected to provide landscape architecture services. These services include the managing, inspecting, and overseeing of developer and County landscape projects, as well as performing the duties of a landscape designer, landscape architect, landscape plan checker, landscape construction field inspector, grounds, and facilities inspector and/or playground safety inspector. The consultant will be involved in projects primarily for areas within the Countywide Landscaping District (LL-2) and County Service Areas (CSAs). APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Rochelle Johnson (925) 313-2299 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque- Engineering Services, Carl Roner- Special Districts, Rochelle Johnson - Special Districts, Carmen Piggee- Special Districts C. 57 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Consulting Services Agreement with David L. Gates & Associates, Inc., Countywide. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without the approval of the Board of Supervisors, this Consulting Services Agreement would not be executed. This would delay implementation of landscape improvements within various special districts in the County and may delay approval of right of way landscape improvements in private developments. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a Consulting Services Agreement (contract) with Stantec Consulting Services Inc., in an amount not to exceed $500,000, to provide on-call landscape architect services for the period October 1, 2022, through September 30, 2025, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Special Revenue Funds. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department is involved in the development and review of landscape improvement projects throughout the County. As part of this regular work, consultant services are required to augment Public Works staff and provide special technical assistance on an on-call basis. After a solicitation process, Stantec Consulting Services Inc., was one of three firms selected to provide landscape architecture services. These services include the managing, inspecting, and overseeing of developer and County landscape projects, as well as performing the duties of a landscape designer, landscape architect, landscape plan checker, landscape construction field inspector, grounds, and facilities inspector and/or playground safety inspector. The consultant will be involved in projects primarily for areas within the Countywide Landscaping District (LL-2) and County Service Areas (CSAs). APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Rochelle Johnson (925) 313-2299 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque- Engineering Services, Carl Roner- Special Districts, Rochelle Johnson - Special Districts, Carmen Piggee- Special Districts C. 58 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Consulting Services Agreement with Stantec Consulting Services Inc., Countywide. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without the approval of the Board of Supervisors, this Consulting Services Agreement would not be executed. This would delay implementation of landscape improvements within various special districts in the County and may delay approval of right of way landscape improvements in private developments. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a Consulting Services Agreement (contract) with Albert S. Dutchover d/b/a Dutchover & Associates Landscape Architect, in an amount not to exceed $500,000, to provide on-call landscape architect services for the period October 1, 2022, through September 30, 2025, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Special Revenue Funds. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department is involved in the development and review of landscape improvement projects throughout the County. As part of this regular work, consultant services are required to augment Public Works staff and provide special technical assistance on an on-call basis. After a solicitation process, Albert S. Dutchover d/b/a Dutchover & Associates Landscape Architect was one of three firms selected to provide landscape architecture services. These services include the managing, inspecting, and overseeing of developer and County landscape projects, as well as performing the duties of a landscape designer, landscape architect, landscape plan checker, landscape construction field inspector, grounds, and facilities inspector and/or playground safety inspector. The consultant will be involved in projects primarily for areas within the Countywide Landscaping District (LL-2) and County Service Areas (CSAs). APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Rochelle Johnson (925) 313-2299 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque- Engineering Services, Carl Roner- Special Districts, Rochelle Johnson - Special Districts, Carmen Piggee- Special Districts C. 59 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Consulting Services Agreement with Albert S. Dutchover d/b/a Dutchover & Associates Landscape Architect, Countywide. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without the approval of the Board of Supervisors, this Consulting Services Agreement would not be executed. This would delay implementation of landscape improvements within various special districts in the County and may delay approval of right of way landscape improvements in private developments. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent or designee to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a Purchase Order with Polymedco, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,200,000 to purchase reagents and supplies to perform immunochemical fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) for the Clinical Laboratory at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) for the period from October 1, 2022, through September 30, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this action will result in expenditures of up to $1,200,000 over the three-year period between October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2025 and will be funded 100% by the Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. BACKGROUND: Polymedco, Inc.’s OC-Auto Micro 80 Analyzer with FOBT-CHECK is an automated immunochemical fecal occult blood testing system that detects human red cells only with no interferences from red meat, turnips, melons, aspirin, anti-inflammatory drugs, and vitamin C. This improvement directs many more of the “right” patients to colonoscopy leading to the earlier detection of polyps and colorectal cancer. The increased sensitivity and specifics of this test over the current method is expected to improve detection of early-stage colon cancer, which currently is the third most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the U.S. at 30%. The increased specificity results in fewer false positives, allowing the correct identification of those patients who need expensive colonoscopy procedures. Replacing the sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy with this lab test for cancer screening will significantly reduce the overall cost to the organization. On August 6, 2019, the Board approved agenda item C.77 to execute a purchase order with Polymedco, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $600,000 for the period of October 1, 2019 through September 30, 2022. On June 21, 2022, the Board approved agenda item C.97 to execute an amendment to purchase order #16899 with Polymedco, Inc., to increase the payment limit by $150,000 to a new payment limit of $750,000 with no change to the original term of October 1, 2019 through September 30, 2022. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Sam Ferrell, (925) 357-7483 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 60 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Purchase Order with Polymedco, Inc. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Polymedco, Inc. provides reagents and supplies to perform immunochemical fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) for Polymedco, Inc.’s OC-Auto Micro 80 Analyzer with FOBT-CHECK, therefore a sole source justification was completed. Approval of this purchase order request will allow the department to continue purchasing immunochemical fecal occult blood testing reagents and supplies from Polymedco, Inc. through September 30, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this purchase rder is not approved, the Clinical Lab will not have the ability to procure the necessary supplies and reagents from Polymedco, Inc. and will be unable to support testing needs for the hospital. This will have a significant negative impact on patient care, as early detection is a key tool for patients to maintain their overall good health. Further, the lab would need to send patient samples out to reference laboratories, which will result in an increase in the cost per test and additional courier fees. ATTACHMENTS RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Defender, or designee, to execute an amendment with Rubicon Programs, Inc. to extend the term from September 30, 2022 through March 31, 2023 and increase the payment limit by $204,971 to a new payment of $510,671 to provide client services in Contra Costa County for Holistic Intervention Partnership (HIP) participants. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% funding from the California Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC). The additional funding for this contract is through a reallocation of funds from another vendor in the grant whom decided not to participate in the program. BACKGROUND: The Holistic Intervention Partnership (HIP) is an innovative holistic defense program funded by a three-year $3 million Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) from the California Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC). Contra Costa is one of only two Public Defenders Offices in the state to receive a JAG grant as part of a total $16.2 million in JAG funding awarded by BSCC to criminal and civil attorneys, as well as social workers and non-lawyer specialists, to assist with underlying issues such as unstable housing, substance use disorders, immigration, public benefits, and other issues commonly affecting individuals with law enforcement contact. In May, 2022, the BSCC amended our award and extended it to June 30, 2023. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Susan Woodhouse, 925-335-8031 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 61 To:Board of Supervisors From:Ellen McDonnell, Public Defender Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Defender, or designee, to execute a contract amendment/extension contract with Rubicon Programs, Inc. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) HIP goals are to: 1. Reduce the financial and human resource burden of misdemeanor cases on law enforcement, the justice system, and the community 2. Reduce future criminal justice system involvement among program participants 3. Establish early coordination, collaboration and linkages across system partners to better serve indigent individuals involved in the criminal justice system The Contra Costa Public Defender's Office is Partnering with Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homeless Services, Behavioral Health Services; Employment and Human Services; California Highway Patrol; Antioch, Martinez, and Richmond Police Departments; and Rubicon. This proposed amendment/extension is to provide continued services to HIP clients throughout Contra Costa County for the last (6) six months of this (3 1/2) three and a half year project. The additional funding for this contract is through a reallocation of funds from another vendor in the grant whom decided not to participate in the program. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Valuable services to HIP participants will not be provided resulting in possible increased cost to law enforcement, justice system, and the community. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: N/A RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute an updated Exhibit A - Order Form with Periscope Holdings, Inc., effective September 20, 2022, to replace the existing Exhibit A – Order Form in the Master SaaS and Services Agreement dated September 8, 2020. The updated Exhibit A – Order Form will increase the payment limit of the Agreement by $55,000 to $485,767, for hosted purchasing and procurement software, services, and maintenance and support, with no change to the term September 8, 2020 through September 8, 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% General Fund. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Carrie Ricci, (925) 313-2235 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 62 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute an Order Form with Periscope Holdings, Inc. BACKGROUND: The Master SaaS and Services Agreement (Master Agreement) with Periscope Holdings, Inc. allowed the Purchasing Division to upgrade to the current version of BuySpeed software, to move to cloud-hosted services, and included staff training. The Master Agreement included future upgrades and software support for three years. The Master Agreement provides for additional statements of work to be issued thereunder when additional services are required by the County. In June 2021, a statement of work was issued for $10,350 for technical support to create custom reports within the software. In June 2022, a second statement of work was executed for up to $20,000 to allow for technical configuration and assistance to the County in its use and implementation of its new financial management system. A third statement of work is anticipated for additional reporting capabilities. It has been determined that additional funds are needed to cover the remaining contract term. An Order Form is required to add a line item to the agreement for the additional services and maintenance required through the end of the term. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: There will not be sufficient funds in the Master Agreement for the additional services needed by the County. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A - Order Form Exhibit A - Order Form General information: Customer: County of Contra Costa, CA Customer Contact: Carolyn Halstenson Billing Contact: same Address: 40 Muir Road, 2nd Floor City, State Zip: Martinez, CA 94553 Address: City, State Zip: Phone: (925) 957-2497 Phone: E-Mail: carolyn.halstenson@pw.cccounty.us E-Mail: Services information: Subscription Services: Periscope shall provide Customer subscription access to Periscope's BuySpeed/ePro hosted eProcurement solution (the "Platform") In accordance with the Master Agreement and the Service Level Standards set forth therein. Services Effective Date: The date the Platform (UAT) is first made available for Customer access in accordance with this Order Form and the Master Agreement, as reasonably determined by Periscope Service Fee: Total SaaS Fee Initial Term: .......................... $125,000 Payable on Services Effective Date, annually on each anniversary date• Customer will be issued a pro-rated credit of previous M&S fee from 4/1/20- 3/31/21 based on the Services Effective Date of the Master Agreement Total Implementation Service Fee ................. $55,767, Payable per SOW Attachment A - Implementation Service Billing and Milestone Acceptance Schedule Total Amount for BI Module Consulting and ePro Standard Integration……………………...$55,000 Total Annual SaaS Fees: Year 1: $125,000 Year 2: $125,000 Year 3: $125,000 •SaaS can be prorated and adjusted from current M&S period (4/1/20 - 3/31/21 Annual Fee Increase Percentage: 3% annually each year after Initial Term (after Year 3) Expected Services Effective Date: On or about 10/15/2020* Initial Term: 3 year(s) Renewal Term: _1_ year(s) This Order Form is made part of, and subject to, that certain Master SaaS and Services Agreement dated 09/08/2020 between Periscope Holdings, Inc., and the Customer listed above (the "Master Agreement") and includes and incorporates the attached Service Level Standards and Statement of Work. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Master Agreement. In the event of a conflict between the Master Agreement and the terms of this Order Form, this Order Form shall control. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Periscope and Customer have caused their duly authorized representatives to execute this Order Form as of 09/0B/2020. Periscope: Periscope Holdings, Inc. By: ____________________________________________ Name: _________________________________________ Title: __________________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________ Customer: County of Contra Costa, CA By: ____________________________________________ Name: __________________________________________ Title: ___________________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION(S): ALLOCATE $250,000 from the Livable Communities Trust (District IV portion) to Monument Crisis Center, as recommended by Supervisor Mitchoff. 1. AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to execute a contract, subject to approval by the County Administrator and approval as to form by County Counsel, with Monument Crisis Center in an amount not to exceed $250,000 to augment programs for meal delivery, social services, job training and education and for referrals for services provided by other organizations to families and individuals in crisis situations for the period October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027. 2. FISCAL IMPACT: No General Fund impact. The $250,000 required for the contract will come from the District IV allocation of the deposits into the Livable Community Trust. The current available balance in the District IV portion of the fund is approximately $787,000 (this total does not reflect the proposed $250,000 allocation). BACKGROUND: The Livable Communities Trust Fund is a Special Revenue Mitigation Fund that was established by the Board of Supervisors on November 15, 2005, following the approval of the Camino Tassajara Combined General Plan Amendment Project, also known as the Alamo Creek and Intervening Property residential projects, and was required as a condition of approval. The Fund was established to implement the County’s Smart Growth Action Plan. The residential developers pay an $8,000 per unit fee (excluding the affordable housing portions of the projects) into the Fund. The Department of Conservation and Development administers the Fund. On December 3, 2013, the Board of Supervisors determined that revenue from the Fund should be spent equally among supervisorial districts. At complete build-out, deposits to the Fund will total $8,448,000. As of June 1, 2022, the account has collected $8,376,000 in revenue fees, and $880,125.68 accrued interest with $4,827,732.04 remaining in uncommitted funds. The approved expenditures to date are attached. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: John Kopchik (925) 655-2780 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 63 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Allocation of Livable Communities Trust funds to Monument Crisis Center BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Monument Crisis Center is community-based nonprofit family resource center for Central and East Contra Costa County. The Monument Crisis Center provides food, education, assistance, referrals to families and individuals in crisis situations, and promotes community awareness of needs and available resources to at-risk and low income people in Contra Costa County. The proposed livable community trust funds from the County would be used by Monument Crisis Center to augment programs for meal delivery, social services, job training and education and for referrals for services provided by other organizations to families and individuals in crisis situations. The use of the funds for these programs will support Smart Growth Action Plan number 4: To promote economic revitalization and urban infill communities. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The contract with the Monument Crisis Center will support the following children’s outcome: (5) Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families. ATTACHMENTS Livable Communities Trust Fund Project List Liveable Communities Trust FundList of Projects1456789101112131415161718192021ABCD E FGHIJ K L MProject No.Board DateGrant RecipientProjectSmart Growth Action Plan GoalDistrict I District II District III District IV District VTotal Expenditures*Remaining BalanceRate of Expenditure2013‐01 10/22/2013DCDNorthern Waterfront  4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities50,000$        50,000$     50,000$     50,000$        50,000$     250,000.00$                 ‐$                     100%2016‐01 6/14/2016CHDCHeritage Point Apartments2. Construct, develop, or renovate affordable housing to meet regional housing goals927,494$      ‐$            ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            927,494$                      ‐$                     100%2016‐02 12/20/2016DCDMarsh Creek Trail5. Fund transit & other transportation improvements which foster smart growth‐$               ‐$            250,000$   ‐$               ‐$            221,001.35$                 28,998.65$         88%2016‐03 12/20/2016DCDAgriculture Policy Study3. Innovative land use planning: mixed use & infill development‐$               ‐$            150,000$   ‐$               ‐$            111,681.84$                 38,318.16$         74%2017‐01 3/7/2017AglantisAgra Tech Solar Light Greenhouse 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities‐$               ‐$            ‐$            25,000$        25,000$     50,000$                         ‐$                     100%2017‐02 3/14/2017Mobility MattersRides for Veterans5. Fund transit & other transportation improvements which foster smart growth‐$               33,458$     ‐$            50,187$        ‐$            83,645$                         ‐$                     100%2017‐03 9/19/2017Garden Park Apartments Community Garden Park Apartments2. Construct, develop, or renovate affordable housing to meet regional housing goals‐$               ‐$            ‐$            125,000$      ‐$            125,000$                      ‐$                     100%2018‐01 1/16/2018PWDSRV Street Smarts ‐ 2017/185. Fund transit & other transportation improvements which foster smart growth‐$               20,000$     ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            20,000$                         ‐$                     100%2018‐02 2/27/2018H3Contra Costa Housing Security Fund2. Construct, develop, or renovate affordable housing to meet regional housing goals‐$               10,000$     ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            10,000$                         ‐$                     100%2018‐03 3/27/2018PWDNewell Avenue Pathway5. Fund transit & other transportation improvements which foster smart growth‐$               75,000$     ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            75,000$                         ‐$                     100%2018‐04 3/27/2018Innovation Tri ValleyTri Valley Rising Report3. Innovative land use planning: mixed use & infill development‐$               10,000$     ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            10,000$                         ‐$                     100%2018‐05 6/12/2018PWDRYSE Acq. ‐ Phase 1 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities25,000$        ‐$            ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            25,000$                         ‐$                     100%2018‐06 12/4/2018PWDSRV Street Smarts ‐ 2018/195. Fund transit & other transportation improvements which foster smart growth‐$               20,000$     ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            20,000$                         ‐$                     100%2018‐07 12/18/2018Choice in AgingInfrastructure Workforce Development1. Clean up land for redevelopment and create jobs near existing housing.‐$               ‐$            ‐$            13,200$        ‐$            13,200$                         ‐$                     100%2019‐01 1/15/2019PWDFriends of the El Sobrante Library 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities15,045$        ‐$            ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            15,045$                         ‐$                     100%2019‐02 3/26/2019PWDRYSE Acq. ‐ Phase 2 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities42,500$        ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            42,500$                         ‐$                     100%2019‐03 3/26/2019RYSE CenterCapital Expansion 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities51,174$        ‐$            ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            51,174$                         ‐$                     100%2019‐04 6/18/2019Innovation Tri ValleyVision Plan Investment3. Innovative land use planning: mixed use & infill development‐$               10,000$     ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            10,000$                         ‐$                     100% Liveable Communities Trust FundList of Projects22232425262728293031323334353637383940ABCD E FGHIJ K L MProject No.Board DateGrant RecipientProjectSmart Growth Action Plan GoalDistrict I District II District III District IV District VTotal Expenditures*Remaining BalanceRate of Expenditure2019‐06 7/30/2019PWDBeautification Bay Point 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities‐$               ‐$            ‐$            ‐$               50,000$     50,000$                         ‐$                     100%2019‐07 7/30/2019DCDDistrict V Code Enforcement 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities‐$               ‐$            ‐$            ‐$               100,000$   100,000$                      ‐$                     100%2019‐08 10/22/2019PWDSRV Street Smarts ‐ 2019/205. Fund transit & other transportation improvements which foster smart growth‐$               20,000$     ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            20,000$                         ‐$                     100%2020‐01 9/22/2020Community HSG Dev. Corp. NRHeritage Point Commercial 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities505,336$      ‐$            ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            ‐$                               505,336$             0%2020‐02 12/15/2020PWDSmarts ‐ 2020/215. Fund transit & other transportation improvements which foster smart growth‐$               10,000$     ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            10,000$                         ‐$                     100%2022‐01 5/10/2022Library FoundationMisc. Library Programs 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities‐$               ‐$            ‐$            250,000$      ‐$            ‐$                               250,000$             0%2022‐02 5/10/2022Walnut Creek Library FoundationMisc. Library Programs 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities‐$               ‐$            ‐$            250,000$      ‐$            ‐$                               250,000$             0%2022‐03 5/10/2022Clayton Community FoundationMisc. Library Programs 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities‐$               ‐$            ‐$            250,000$      ‐$            ‐$                               250,000$             0%2022‐04 5/10/2022PWDSRV Street Smarts ‐ 2021/22 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities‐$               20,000$     ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            20,000$                         ‐$                     100%2022‐05 5/10/2022PWDSRV Street Smarts ‐ 2022/235. Fund transit & other transportation improvements which foster smart growth‐$               20,000$     ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            20,000$                         ‐$                     100%2022‐06 6/21/2022Moraga Community FoundationMoraga Commons Enhancement 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities‐$               25,000$     ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            ‐$                               25,000$               0%2022‐07 6/21/2022The Lafayette Park TrustLafayette Theater Project3. Innovative land use planning: mixed use & infill development‐$               25,000$     ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            ‐$                               25,000$               0%2022‐08 6/21/2022City of OrindaCommunity Park Master Plan ‐ 3. Innovative land use planning: mixed use & infill development‐$               25,000$     ‐$            ‐$               ‐$            ‐$                               25,000$               0%2022‐10 9/20/2022Monument Crisis CenterMonument Crisis Center 4. Economic Revitalization in Urban Infill Communities‐$               ‐$            ‐$            250,000$      ‐$            ‐$                               250,000$             0%‐$              ‐$          ‐$          ‐$              ‐$           ‐$                              ‐$                    0%1,616,549$  373,458$  450,000$  1,263,387$  225,000$   2,280,741$                  1,647,653$        58%* Reflects expenditures made by DCD, including payments to other County departments or non‐profit organizations. Committed or Expended Funds RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Flock Group, Inc., on behalf of the Office of hte Sheriff, effective October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2024 in an amount not to exceed $70,200 for the acquisition and installation of automatic license plate reader cameras in County Service Area P-2B and provision of a hosted software system. FISCAL IMPACT: No County Impact; 100% funded by County Service Area P2-B Alamo. BACKGROUND: Flock Group, Inc. provides license plate reading cameras with 24/7 monitoring for homes, businesses, and neighborhoods to protect against property crime, violent crime, stolen vehicles, and more. In June of 2021, members of the Alamo Police Service Advisory Committee (P-2B) began to review options for increased security in their area due to increased burglaries and violent crime in their community. A review of actual crime statistics in the Alamo area did not show a significant increase in reported crimes; however, there were several high-profile cases that news outlets covered in the area. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Chrystine Robbins, 925-655-0008 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 64 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Flock Group, Inc. for P-2 Alamo BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) After reviewing several options and fiscal impact, the Advisory Committee agreed that implementing automatic license plate reader (ALPR) cameras in the district neighborhoods will significantly help prevent and solve crime in the Alamo district. Flock ALPR cameras provide the preventative and investigative value needed in the Alamo area. The cameras are the same type utilized in the neighboring community of Danville and would provide continuing coverage of the area to prevent and investigate crimes within the communities. The proposed contract obligates the County to indemnify Flock for any third party claims arising out of a breach of County’s obligations under the agreement, County’s and from County’s use of the Services. Flock’s liability under the agreement is limited to the amounts paid by County in the 12 months preceding any claim. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: ALPR cameras will not be purchased and there will be no additional measures in place to deter and solve crime. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: None. ATTACHMENTS Alamo Confirmation Letter P2B / Alamo Police Service Advisory Committee Contra Costa County, California 22 August 2022 To: Contra Costa County, Office of The Sheriff Lieutenant Scott Wooden Re: Flock Safety Cameras Dear Lt. Wooden, At the request of Chair Joe Rubay Vice-Chair Christy Campbell the P2B Advisory Committee (“Committee”) recently reviewed and analyzed the Flock Safety Cameras (“Flock”) for the P2B area. At the July 2022 meeting the Committee unanimously voted to pay for installation and use of 12 Flock cameras. The Committee recognizes that each Flock camera will cost $2,800 annually per camera, with a one-time installation cost of $250 per camera. Please forwards our recommendation to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors for final approval. __________________________ Ross A. Hillesheim P2B Committee, Treasurer RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Flock Group Inc., on behalf of the Office of the Sheriff, effective October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2024 in an amount not to exceed $35,100 for the acquisition and installation of automatic license plate reader cameras in County Service Area P-5 and provision of a hosted software system. FISCAL IMPACT: No County Impact; 100% funded by County Service Area P-5 Round Hill funds BACKGROUND: Flock Group Inc. provides license plate reading cameras with 24/7 monitoring for homes, businesses, and neighborhoods to protect against property crime, violent crime, stolen vehicles, and more. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Chrystine Robbins, 925-655-0008 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 65 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Flock Group, Inc. for P-5 Round Hill BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) At the August 10, 2022 meeting of the Citizen’s Police Advisory Committee (P-5) a motion was made and passed unanimously to fund a two year lease commitment of six Flock Safety automatic license plate reader (ALPR) cameras in the district neighborhoods to significantly help prevent and solve crime. The cameras are the same type utilized in the neighboring communities of Alamo and Danville and would provide continuing coverage of the area to prevent and investigate crimes within the communities. The proposed contract obligates the County to indemnify Flock for any third party claims arising out of a breach of County’s obligations under the agreement, County’s and from County’s use of the Services. Flock’s liability under the agreement is limited to the amounts paid by County in the 12 months preceding any claim. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: ALPR cameras will not be purchased and there will be no additional measures in place to deter and solve crime. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: None. ATTACHMENTS Round Hill Confirmation Letter CITIZEN’S POLICE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Round Hill (P-5) Alamo, California August 10, 2022 To: Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Department Attn.: Lt. Scott Wooden At the August 10, 2022 meeting of the Citizen’s Police Advisory Committee (P-5) a motion was made and passed unanimously to fund a two year lease commitment of six Flock Safety cameras at $2500.00 per camera per year and an additional $300.00 per year per camera for retention of video records for the period of a year. In addition funding for the installation of the cameras at $250.00 per camera is approved. Leland Mlejnek, Secretary of the P-5 Committee RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute County Interagency Agreement #23-367-14 with the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD), a public agency, in an amount not to exceed $5,376,369 to provide standardized paramedic level emergency medical first responder services in coordination with the Contra Costa County Emergency Medical System and to satisfy regulatory requirements as an approved paramedic service provider, for the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $5,376,369 over a 3-year period and will be funded 100% by CSA EM-1 (Measure H) revenue. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: County Service Area EM-1 was established in 1989 to provide enhanced emergency medical services, including rapid paramedic-staffed ambulance response, to the residents of Contra Costa County. In May, 2013, the Board of Supervisors adopted the population-based allocation formula (CSA-EM1 Zone B fire agencies) to preserve the First Response Funding affected by reductions associated with fire station closures. On June 11, 2019, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #23-367-13 with Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, in an amount not to exceed $4,601,166 to provide prehospital emergency medical first responder services of its First Responder Paramedic Program, for the period from July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2022. County Interagency Agreement #23-367-14 includes the jurisdiction previously serviced by East Contra Costa County Fire Protection District that was recently annexed into CCCFPD. Approval of Interagency Agreement #23-367-14 will allow the Emergency Medical Services Division to continue to provide the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District with funding for its paramedic emergency medical first responder program through June 30, 2025. This contract includes mutual indemnification to hold both parties harmless for any claims arising out of the performance of this contract. This contract APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Marshall Bennett, 925-608-5454 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker, M Wilhelm C. 66 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Interagency Agreement #23-367-14 with Contra Costa County Fire Protection District BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) is retroactive due to lengthy language negotiations between the contractor and County staff. This contract is part of a comprehensive countywide process to standardize first responder Measure H contracts for fire agencies in Contra Costa County. The County has worked extensively to support CCCFPD throughout this contract update process. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District will not meet California Code of Regulations requirement to be an authorized Advanced Life Support (Paramedic) Provider nor will CCCFPD be eligible for Measure H First Responder and ALS program support. This would negatively impact patient care within the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. ATTACHMENTS RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment Agreement #26-583-34 with Specialty Laboratories, Inc. (dba Quest Diagnostic Nichols Institute), a corporation, effective August 10, 2022, to amend Contract #26-583-30, (as amended by Amendment Agreements #26-583-31 and #26-583-32) to modify the rate schedule to include additional outside laboratory testing services with no change to the payment limit of $7,000,000 or term of January 1, 2021 through December 31, 2022. FISCAL IMPACT: This amendment will not impact the original payment limit of $7,000,000 which has been funded by 71% Hospital Enterprise Fund I and 29% Federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act. (Additional rate) BACKGROUND: Specialty Laboratories, Inc. (dba Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute) provides outside clinical laboratories testing for tests that are rarely requested and require special equipment which CCRMC does not have onsite. This contract also includes COVID-19 testing which helps to serve as a backup if needed. This contractor has been providing outside clinical laboratory testing for CCRMC since January 2007. On January 19, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-583-30 with Specialty Laboratories, Inc. (dba Quest Diagnostic Nichols Institute), in an amount not to exceed $7,000,000 for the provision of outside clinical laboratory services, with no change in the payment limit or term for the period January 1, 2021 through December 31, 2022. On January 18, 2022, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract Amendment Agreement #26-583-31 effective May 1, 2021, to include additional outside clinical laboratory services, with no change in the payment limit of $7,000,000 or term January 1, 2021 through December 31, 2022. On May 24, 2022, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract Amendment Agreement #26-583-32, effective April 15, 2022, to modify the contract language to include additional third-party billing services in addition to outside clinical laboratory services, with no change in APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Jaspreet Benepal, 925-370-5501 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: K Cyr, M Wilhelm C. 67 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment Agreement #26-583-34 with Specialty Laboratories, Inc. (dba Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) the payment limit of $7,000,000 or term January 1, 2021 through December 31, 2022. Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #26-583-34 will allow the contractor to provide additional outside laboratory testing services for the Monkey Pox virus, with no change in the payment limit of $7,000,000 or term of January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2022. Due to the urgent nature of the Monkey Pox virus outbreak the Department is requesting this contract amendment be effective August 10, 2022, as this is the date the contractor made testing available at CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers for the benefit of County patients. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, the contractor will not provide additional testing services for Monkey Pox virus potentially causing the virus to spread faster through the community. ATTACHMENTS RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment Agreement #77-040-10 with Nazar Mohammad Aryaei (DBA AA Cab Company), an individual, effective September 1, 2022, to amend Contract #77-040-7, to increase the payment limit by $200,000 from $300,000 to a new payment limit of $500,000, with no change in the original term of October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2022. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will result in additional contractual service expenditures of up to $200,000 and will be funded as budgeted 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has been contracting with Nazar Mohammad Aryaei (DBA AA Cab Company) since October 2016 to provide transportation of CCHP members to or from medical appointments at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center, Health Center/Clinics, or other medical facilities. This contractor has been providing transportation services to CCHP members since November 1, 2016. On November 2, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #77-040-7 Nazar Mohammad Aryaei (DBA AA Cab Company), in an amount not to exceed $300,000, for the provision of non-medical transport services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members, for the period October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2022. Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #77-040-10 will increase the payment limit and allow the contractor to providing additional non-medical transportation services to CCHP members through September 30, 2022. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract amendment is not approved, CCHP members will not have access to the non-medical transportation services from this contractor APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Sharron A. Mackey, 925-313-6104 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Noel Garcia, Marcy Wilhelm C. 68 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment Agreement #77-040-10 with Nazar Mohammad Aryaei (DBA AA Cab Company) RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Novation Interagency Agreement #74-191-19 with West Contra Costa Unified School District, a government agency, in an amount not to exceed $749,268, to provide wraparound services to Severely Emotionally Disturbed (SED) children in West Contra Costa County, for the period from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, which includes a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2023, in an amount not to exceed $374,634. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in annual budgeted expenditures of up to $749,268 and will be funded by 50% ($374,634) Federal Medi-Cal, 39% ($295,207) Mental Health Realignment, 10% ($74,427) Measure X Fund, and 1% ($5,000) West Contra Costa Unified School District. (Rate increase) BACKGROUND: This agreement meets the social needs of the County’s population by providing child-family team facilitators and other wraparound services to families of SED children; facilitates multi-agency collaborative service delivery; and minimizes the need for crisis services and involvement with the Juvenile Justice System. West Contra Costa Unified School District has been providing wraparound services to families of SED children for the County since July 2002. On December 7, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved Novation Contract #74-191-18 with West Contra Costa Unified School District, in the amount not to exceed $682,062 for the provision of wraparound services to SED children in West Contra Costa County for the period from July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022, which included a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2022. Approval of Interagency Agreement #74-191-19 replaces the automatic extension under the prior contract and allows the contractor to continue providing services through June 30, 2023. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Suzanne Tavano, 925-957-5212 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: K Cyr, M Wilhelm, M Wilhelm, M Wilhelm C. 69 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Novation Interagency Agreement #74–191–19 with West Contra Costa Unified School District CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, there will be fewer wraparound services available to families of children with serious emotional and behavioral disturbances in West Contra Costa County, which may result in the need for crisis services and involvement with the juvenile justice system. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: This program supports the following Board of Supervisors’ community outcomes: “Children Ready For and Succeeding in School”; “Families that are Safe, Stable, and Nurturing”; and “Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families”. Expected program outcomes include an increase in positive social and emotional development as measured by the Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS). RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee to execute the Sixth Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) #28-975-6 with the City of Brentwood, to allow the Health Services Department and the California Department of Public Health contractors to continue to use the City’s Brentwood Technology and Education Center for COVID-19 testing and immunizations through December 31, 2022. FISCAL IMPACT: This is a non-financial agreement, there is no cost to the County associated with this MOA. BACKGROUND: The County’s Health Officer has determined that accessible, timely testing and immunizations are critical to reduce transmission of the COVID-19 virus and to protect the community. On July 29, 2021, the parties entered into the MOA between Contra Costa County and City of Brentwood for mutual aid assistance in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, authorizing COVID-19-related services to occur at the Brentwood Education & Technology Center, for the period from July 29, 2021 through December 31, 2021. On December 14, 2021, the parties entered into an amendment agreement to extend the termination date of the MOU from December 31, 2021 to April 30, 2022. On April 26, 2022, the Board of Supervisors approved Amendment #28-975-2 to the MOA to extend the term from April 30, 2022 to May 31, 2022. On May 17, 2022, the Board of Supervisors approved Amendment #28-975-3 to extend the term to June 30, 2022 and authorized the County Administrator to approve successive monthly amendments though September 30, 2022. Amendments were subsequently approved to extend the MOA through August 31, 2022. The parties now wish to extend the termination date of the MOU from August 31, 2022 to December 31, 2022. At the September 13, 2022 Board meeting, the Health Services Department presented a COVID-19, which included the Department's transition plan. Maintaining this MOA with the City of Brentwood APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Anna Roth, 925-957-2670 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: Marcy Wilhelm C. 70 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Memorandum of Agreement Amendment #28-975-6 with City of Brentwood BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) allows the Department to continue operating this State-run site as needed to respond to the fluctuating vaccine and testing needs of East County residents. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, the Health Services Department will not be able to provide additional COVID-19 testing and immunization services at this facility for East County residents. RECOMMENDATION(S): CONTINUE the emergency action originally taken by the Board of Supervisors on November 16, 1999 regarding the issue of homelessness in Contra Costa County. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: On November 16, 1999, the Board of Supervisors declared a local emergency, pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 8630 on homelessness in Contra Costa County. Government Code Section 8630 requires that, for a body that meets weekly, the need to continue the emergency declaration be reviewed at least every 60 days until the local emergency is terminated. The Board of Supervisors last reviewed and continued the emergency declaration on July 26, 2022. Nevertheless, with the continuing high number of homeless individuals and insufficient funding available to assist in sheltering all homeless individuals and families, the emergency situation still exists and it is, therefore, appropriate for the Board to continue the declaration of a local emergency regarding homelessness. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Christy Saxton, 925-608-6700 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 71 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:CONTINUE EXTENSION OF EMERGENCY DECLARATION REGARDING HOMELESSNESS RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/270 authorizing revised operating hours for Contra Costa County Library branches from the hours approved under Resolution No. 2021/110 on March 30, 2021, to increase the County-funded base hours open to the public from 35 to 40 hours per week and update additional City-funded hours for selected branches. FISCAL IMPACT: All the costs of the modified operating schedule for the Pittsburg Library will be reimbursed by the City of Pittsburg. All costs of the modified operating schedule for the Project Second Chance - Adult & Family literacy program are 100% Library Fund. BACKGROUND: Library open hours are funded primarily from an apportionment of countywide property tax revenue and, in some locations, city revenues. Since FY 2009-10, the countywide property tax apportionment provided a base service level of 35 open hours per week with cities having the option to purchase extra hours on an annual basis. Full-service libraries in unincorporated areas are open no more than the base county open hours since there is no city entity to provide funding for extra hours. In June 2020, the Library eliminated two-thirds of its substitute permanent-intermittent positions to address the anticipated loss of revenue due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The reduction in substitute staff made it necessary for library administration to develop a more efficient staffing strategy. As a result, in July 2020 the 35 base open hour schedule was standardized across all library branches as a Tuesday through Saturday schedule, with branch locations offering seven hours open to the public each day. For Fiscal Year 2021-22, the Library also standardized the extra hour options offered to cities. Cities may fund 6, 12 or 16 extra hours per week. Each option has a set open hours schedule. This a more efficient and transparent way to provide extra hour estimates to cities and provides more consistent open hours for the public, who often use several library branches across the County. It will also create more consistent staffing schedules, which will contribute to a more efficient ease of operations. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Walt Beveridge 925-608-7730 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 72 To:Board of Supervisors From:Alison McKee, County Librarian Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Library Open Hours Effective October 1, 2022 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Attachment A reflects the proposed operating hours for the 40 base open hours, as well as the change in open hours for libraries whose cities have opted to fund extra hours (this year the City of Pittsburg will fund additional open hours at their library for the first time). If approved, these changes will be effective beginning October 1, 2022. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Library hours will remain unchanged and those wishing to extend their hours will be unable to do so. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2022/270 Attachment A - Library Operating Hours MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2022/270 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 09/20/2022 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2022/270 IN THE MATTER OF MODIFYING THE HOURS OF OPERATION FOR THE LIBRARY WHEREAS, on June 22, 2021, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution 2021/195 authorizing a change in operating hours for the library that deviated from the standard operating hours (8 am-12 noon; 1 pm-5 pm) set under County Ordinance No. 22-2.202; and WHEREAS, the library wishes to continue its practice of offering hours beyond what is prescribed in County Ordinance No. 22-2.202 (7:30 am to 5 pm, Monday to Friday, No Lunch Breaks) to better accommodate the needs of the public; and WHEREAS, a number of cities in Contra Costa County have requested changes to the number of hours per week that their libraries are open; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors does hereby approve the request to update the hours of operation for the Libraries to the hours shown in the attached table (Attachment A); and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution supersedes and replaces Resolution No. 2021/195, which was adopted by the Board on June 22, 2021. Contact: Walt Beveridge 925-608-7730 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: REVISED TABLE A ATTACHMENT July 1, 2022 Department Operating Hours Outside of County Statute Library Li brary Address Hour s Approved Resolution No. 2021/195 Current Hours/Week Proposed Operating Hours Proposed Hours/Week Antioch Library 501 W. 18th Street 94509 Noon-8pm (Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun, Mon) 40 NO CHANGE 40 Bay Point Li brary 205 Pacifica Avenue 94565 2:30pm-8pm (Mon, Tues, Thurs); 1:30pm-8pm (Wed); 2:30pm-6pm (Fri); 10am-6pm (Sat); Closed (Sun) 34.5 NO CHANGE 34.5 Brentwood Library 104 Oak Street 94513 10am-8pm (Mon, Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun) 52 NO CHANGE 52 Clayton Library 6125 Clayt on Road 94517 Noon-8pm (Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed - Sat); Closed (Sun, Mon) 40 NO CHANGE 40 Concord Library 2900 Salvi o Street 94519 10am-8pm (Mon, Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun) 52 NO CHANGE 52 Crockett Library 991 Loring Avenue 94525 2pm-8pm (Mon); 11am-5pm (Wed, Fri);10am-4pm (Sat); Closed (Tues, Thurs, Sun) 24 NO CHANGE 24 Danville Library 400 Front Street 94526 10am-8pm (Mon-Thur s);10am-6pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun) 56 NO CHANGE 56 Dougherty Station Library 17017 Bolling er Canyon Road, San Ramon,94582 10am-8pm (Tues, Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat), Closed (Sun, Mon) 46 NO CHANGE 46 El Cerrito Library 65l0 Stockton Avenue 94530 10am-8pm (Tues, Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat), Closed (Sun, Mon) 46 NO CHANGE 46 El Sobrante Library 4191 Appian Way 94803 Noon-8pm (Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun, Mon) 40 NO CHANGE 40 Hercul es Library 109 Civic Drive 94547 10am-8pm (Tues, Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun, Mon) 46 NO CHANGE 46 Kensington Libr ary 61Arlington Avenue 94707 Noon-8pm (Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun, Mon) 40 NO CHANGE 40 Lafayette Library 3491 Mt. Diablo Boulevard 94549 10am-8pm (Mon-Thur s);9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun) 56 NO CHANGE 56 Martinez Library 740 Court Street 94553 Noon-8pm (Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun, Mon) 40 NO CHANGE 40 Moraga Library 1500 St. Mary's Road 94556 Noon-8pm (Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun, Mon) 40 NO CHANGE 40 Oakley Library l050 Neroly Road 94561 Noon-8pm (Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed - Sat); Closed (Sun, Mon) 40 NO CHANGE 40 Orinda Library 26 Orinda Way 94563 10am-8pm (Mon-Thur s); 10am-6pm (Fr i, Sat); Closed (Sun) 56 NO CHANGE 56 Pinole Library 2935 Pinole Valley Road 94564 Noon-8pm (Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun, Mon) 40 NO CHANGE 40 Pittsburg Library 80 Power Ave nue 94565 Noon-8pm (Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun, Mon) 40 10am-8pm (Mon, Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun.) 52 Pleasant Hill Temporary Library, 100 Gregory Lane, Pleasant Hill 94523 Noon-8pm (Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun, Mon) 40 NO CHANGE 40 Prewett Library 4703 Lone Tree Way, Antioch 94531 10am-7 pm (Tues); 12pm-8pm (Wed, Thurs); 12pm-5pm (Fri, Sat) 35 NO CHANGE 35 Rodeo Library 220 Pacifi c Avenue 94572 11am-5pm (Mon); 1pm-7pm (Tues, Thurs); 12pm-5pm (Sat); Closed (Sun, Wed, Fri) 23 NO CHANGE 23 San Pablo Library 13751 San Pablo Ave nue 94806 10am-8pm (Mon, Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun.) 52 NO CHANGE 52 San Ramon Library 100 Montg omery Street 94583 10am-8pm (Mon-Thur s);9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun) 56 NO CHANGE 56 Walnut Creek Library 1644 North Broadway 94596 10am-8pm (Mon, Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun) 52 NO CHANGE 52 Ygnacio Valley Library 2661Oak Grove Road, Walnut Creek 94598 10am-8pm (Mon, Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun) 52 NO CHANGE 52 Project Second Chance - Central 2151 Salvio Street, Suite 299 Concord, CA 94520 9am - 5pm (Mon-Fri); Closed (Sat, Sun) 40 NO CHANGE 40 Project Second Chance - East 50l W. 18th Str eet Antioch 94509 Noon-8pm (Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun, Mon) 40 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); Closed (Fri – Tues) 16 Pr oject Second Chance - West/ San Pablo 13751 San Pablo Avenue 94806 10am-8pm (Mon, Tues); 10am-6pm (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri, Sat); Closed (Sun.) 52 Noon-8pm (Mon); 10am-6pm (Tues, Wed, Thurs); Closed (Fri – Sun) 32 Project Second Chance - West/Hercules 109 Civic Drive 94547 10am-6pm (Thurs) 8 No longer a PSC Site 0 Project Second Chance – East/Brentwood 104 Oak Street, 94513 None 0 Noon-8pm (Tues); Closed (Wed, Thurs); 9am-5pm (Fri); Closed (Sat, Sun, Mon) 16 Library Administration 777 Arnold Drive, Suite 210, Martinez 94553 8am-5pm (Mon-Fri); Closed (Sat,Sun) 40 NO CHANGE 40 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE submission of the County's FY 2021/22 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the following federal programs: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnership Act (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA), and Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP). FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. This action seeks to approve the year-end performance report for the FY 2021/22 CDBG, HOME, ESG, HOPWA and NSP programs administered by the County. CFDA Nos.: CDBG - 14.218; HOME - 14.239; ESG - 14.231; HOPWA - 14.241; NSP - 14.218. BACKGROUND: Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER): The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, requires all CDBG and HOME entitlement jurisdictions to prepare and submit a CAPER (Attachment A) to the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) by September 30th of each year. The CAPER provides the County and interested stakeholders with an opportunity to evaluate the progress in carrying out priorities and objectives contained in the County's five-year Consolidated Plan and annual Action Plan. HUD uses the CAPER to evaluate whether: (1) the County has carried out projects/programs as described in its Consolidated Plan and annual Action Plan; (2) the CDBG, HOME, ESG, NSP, and HOPWA assisted activities are eligible and meet a national objective, and if expenditures meet certain statutory requirements; and (3) the County has demonstrated a continuing capacity to carry out its HUD funded programs. The basic elements of the CAPER are the following: summary of resources and expenditures, programmatic accomplishments, status of actions taken during the year to implement objectives contained in the Consolidated Plan, and evaluation of progress made during the year in addressing identified priority needs and objectives. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: 925-655-2893 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 73 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:FY 2021/22 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Highlights of the FY 2021/22 CAPER include the following: The County received approximately $8.5 million in FY 2021/22 CDBG,HOME, HOPWA, ESG funds for use in accomplishing housing and non-housing community development objectives. The County expended $7 million on approved projects and programs (expenditures were for projects awarded funds in previous years and FY 2021/22). For each dollar of the County federal funds spent for projects that were completed during the year, $14.30 was leveraged from other federal, State, local, and private resources. Over 36,000 lower income persons/families were served through public service programs. 3 lower income persons were placed in jobs through economic development programs. 226 microenterprises/businesses were assisted through economic development programs. 4 Infrastructure/Public Facilities projects were completed. 6 rental housing units were rehabilitated and occupied for low-income veterans. 7 owner-occupied homes were rehabilitated. 19 low income renters received services and/or financial assistance to prevent them from being homeless or to quickly regain housing following an episode of being homeless. In addition, the County received additional funds from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), to add approximately $7.02 million in Community Development Block Grant-Coronavirus (CDBG-CV) funds and $10.6 million in Emergency Solutions Grant-Coronavirus (ESG-CV) funds, for use in accomplishing housing and non-housing community development objectives in response to COVID-19. The County is still expending those additional resources and staff anticipates expenditure of those funds to continue through June 30, 2023. As of June 30, 2022, the additional funds have assisted in providing the following to address the impacts of COVID-19: 11,531 lower-income persons/families were aided in Food Security. 48 microenterprises were awarded grants. 19 low-income renters received financial assistance to prevent them from being homeless during the pandemic. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County cannot submit the CAPER without Board approval, which may jeopardize future HUD funding. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The project/programs funded with CDBG, HOME, ESG, HOPWA, and NSP funds support one or more of the following children's outcomes: (1) Children Ready for and Succeeding in School; (2) Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive Adulthood; (3) Families that are Economically Self Sufficient; (4) Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing; and (5) Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families. ATTACHMENTS FY 2021/22 DRAFT CAPER CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FY2021/22 CAPER (Consolidated Annual Performance & Evaluation Report) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS ACT EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANTS HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PROGRAM September 4, 2022 DRAFT CAPER 2 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Table of Contents CR-05 - Goals and Outcomes ................................................................................................................................ 3 CR-10 - Racial and Ethnic composition of families assisted ................................................................................ 11 CR-15 - Resources and Investments 91.520(a) ................................................................................................... 12 CR-20 - Affordable Housing 91.520(b) ................................................................................................................ 17 CR-25 - Homeless and Other Special Needs 91.220(d, e); 91.320(d, e); 91.520(c) ............................................ 18 CR-30 - Public Housing 91.220(h); 91.320(j) ....................................................................................................... 25 CR-35 - Other Actions 91.220(j)-(k); 91.320(i)-(j) ................................................................................................ 27 CR-40 - Monitoring 91.220 and 91.230 ............................................................................................................... 34 Citizen Participation Plan 91.105(d); 91.115(d) .................................................................................................. 35 CR-45 - CDBG 91.520(c) ...................................................................................................................................... 36 CR-50 - HOME 91.520(d) ..................................................................................................................................... 37 CR-60 - ESG 91.520(g) (ESG Recipients only) ...................................................................................................... 40 CR-65 - Persons Assisted ..................................................................................................................................... 42 CR-70 – ESG 91.520(g) - Assistance Provided and Outcomes ............................................................................. 45 CR-75 – Expenditures .......................................................................................................................................... 47 Attachment A - ESG CAPER (SAGE) ............................................................................................................. 49 Attachment B - Completed Ongoing Projects by Funding Category .......................................................... 61 Attachment C - Public Hearing Notice ........................................................................................................ 76 Attachment D- CDBG Financial Summary Report ....................................................................................... 77 DRAFT CAPER 3 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CR-05 - Goals and Outcomes Progress the jurisdiction has made in carrying out its strategic plan and its action plan. 91.520(a) This could be an overview that includes major initiatives and highlights that were proposed and executed throughout the program year. The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, requires all Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program entitlement jurisdictions to prepare and submit a Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) by September 30 of each year. The CAPER provides the County and interested stakeholders with an opportunity to evaluate the progress in carrying out priorities and objectives contained in the County's five-year Consolidated Plan and annual Action Plan. • Over 36,000 low/moderate-income persons/families were served through the County funded public service programs • 3 low/moderate-income people were placed in jobs through the County funded economic development programs • 226 businesses were assisted through micro-enterprise assistance programs • 4 infrastructure/public facilities projects were completed within low/moderate-income neighborhoods • 6 rental housing units were rehabilitated and occupied by low-income veterans • 7 low/moderate-income owner-occupied homes were rehabilitated • 252 low-income renters received assistance to prevent them from becoming homeless or to help them quickly regain housing following an episode of being homeless • 11,531 lower-income persons/families were aided in food security. • 48 microenterprises were awarded grants to assist businesses in working through the COVID-19 pandemic. • 19 low-income renters received financial assistance to prevent them from being homeless during the COVID-19 pandemic. DRAFT CAPER 4 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Comparison of the proposed versus actual outcomes for each outcome measure submitted with the consolidated plan and explain, if applicable, why progress was not made toward meeting goals and objectives. 91.520(g) Categories, priority levels, funding sources and amounts, outcomes/objectives, goal outcome indicators, units of measure, targets, actual outcomes/outputs, and percentage completed for each of the grantee’s program year goals. DRAFT CAPER 5 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Goal Category Source / Amount Indicator Unit of Measure Expected – Strategic Plan Actual – Strategic Plan Percent Complete Expected – Program Year Actual – Program Year Percent Complete AH-1 New Construction of Affordable Rental Housing Affordable Housing CDBG: $ / HOME: $ Rental units constructed Household Housing Unit 150 0 0.00% 105 0 0.00% AH-2 Homeownership Opportunities Affordable Housing HOME: $ Homeowner Housing Added Household Housing Unit 50 0 0.00% AH-3: Maintain and Preserve Affordable Housing Affordable Housing CDBG: $ / HOME: $ Rental units rehabilitated Household Housing Unit 350 0 0.00% 111 0 0.00% AH-3: Maintain and Preserve Affordable Housing Affordable Housing CDBG: $ / HOME: $ Homeowner Housing Rehabilitated Household Housing Unit 100 6 6.00% 27 6 22.22% AH-4: New Supportive Housing - Special Needs Affordable Housing HOME: $ / HOPWA: $ Rental units constructed Household Housing Unit 40 0 0.00% AH-4: New Supportive Housing - Special Needs Affordable Housing HOME: $ / HOPWA: $ Tenant-based rental assistance / Rapid Rehousing Households Assisted 0 0 50 0 0.00% DRAFT CAPER 6 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) AH-4: New Supportive Housing - Special Needs Affordable Housing HOME: $ / HOPWA: $ Housing for People with HIV/AIDS added Household Housing Unit 25 0 0.00% 5 0 0.00% CD-1: General Public Services Non-Housing Community Development CDBG: $ Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit Persons Assisted 50000 16350 32.70% 10000 16350 163.50% CD-1: General Public Services Non-Housing Community Development CDBG: $ Homeless Person Overnight Shelter Persons Assisted 0 0 0 0 CD-2: Non-Homeless Special Needs Population Non-Homeless Special Needs Non-Housing Community Development CDBG: $ Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit Persons Assisted 7000 12345 176.36% 1400 12371 883.64% CD-3: Youth Non-Housing Community Development CDBG: $ Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit Persons Assisted 10000 2144 21.44% 2000 2144 107.20% CD-4: Fair Housing Non-Housing Community Development CDBG: $ Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit Persons Assisted 200 0 0.00% 40 0 0.00% DRAFT CAPER 7 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CD-5: Economic Development Non-Housing Community Development CDBG: $ Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit Persons Assisted 100 671 671.00% 20 671 3,355.00% CD-5: Economic Development Non-Housing Community Development CDBG: $ Facade treatment/business building rehabilitation Business 0 0 0 0 CD-5: Economic Development Non-Housing Community Development CDBG: $ Jobs created/retained Jobs 25 3 12.00% 5 3 60.00% CD-5: Economic Development Non-Housing Community Development CDBG: $ Businesses assisted Businesses Assisted 900 211 23.44% 180 211 117.22% CD-6: Infrastructure/Public Facilities Non-Housing Community Development CDBG: $ Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit Persons Assisted 5000 0 0.00% CD-6: Infrastructure/Public Facilities Non-Housing Community Development CDBG: $ Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit Persons Assisted 0 31 1000 31 3.10% DRAFT CAPER 8 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CD-7: Administration Administration CDBG: $ / HOME: $ / ESG: $ / HOPWA: $ Other Other 4 0 0.00% 4 0 0.00% H-1: Housing & Supportive Services for Homeless Homeless CDBG: $ / ESG: $ Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit Persons Assisted 5000 0 0.00% H-1: Housing & Supportive Services for Homeless Homeless CDBG: $ / ESG: $ Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit Persons Assisted 0 2132 1000 2132 213.20% H-1: Housing & Supportive Services for Homeless Homeless CDBG: $ / ESG: $ Homeless Person Overnight Shelter Persons Assisted 1630 0 0.00% 326 0 0.00% H-1: Housing & Supportive Services for Homeless Homeless CDBG: $ / ESG: $ Overnight/Emergency Shelter/Transitional Housing Beds added Beds 0 0 0 0 H-2: Rapid Rehousing & Homelessness Prevention Homeless CDBG: $ / ESG: $ Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit Persons Assisted 0 617 0 617 DRAFT CAPER 9 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) H-2: Rapid Rehousing & Homelessness Prevention Homeless CDBG: $ / ESG: $ Tenant-based rental assistance / Rapid Rehousing Households Assisted 90 0 0.00% 18 0 0.00% H-2: Rapid Rehousing & Homelessness Prevention Homeless CDBG: $ / ESG: $ Homelessness Prevention Persons Assisted 50 0 0.00% 10 0 0.00% Table 1 - Accomplishments – Program Year & Strategic Plan to Date DRAFT CAPER 10 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Assess how the jurisdiction’s use of funds, particularly CDBG, addresses the priorities and specific objectives identified in the plan, giving special attention to the highest priority activities identified. All of the County's HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) funding sources address the priorities and specific objectives identified in the FY 2020/2025 Consolidated Plan. All the funded activities meet at least one of the highest priority needs identified in the Consolidated Plan. The County has made significant progress in meeting the goals and objectives contained in the Five-Year Consolidated Plan. During FY 2021/22, CDBG-funded public service projects provided a wide range of social services to over 36,000 Urban County residents and households, including the homeless, mentally and physically disabled, seniors, victims of domestic violence, and other special needs populations. Economic development programs offered training and placement services for 3 lower-income persons and assisted with the creation and expansion of 274 microenterprises/small businesses. There were four Infrastructure/Public Facilities projects completed in FY 2021/22 that created a variety of infrastructure and accessibility improvements. DRAFT CAPER 11 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CR-10 - Racial and Ethnic composition of families assisted Describe the families assisted (including the racial and ethnic status of families assisted). 91.520(a) CDBG HOME ESG White 12,730 0 2,430 Black or African American 6,241 0 1,625 Asian 5,538 0 1,317 American Indian or American Native 514 0 69 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 393 0 385 Total 25,416 0 5,826 Hispanic 3,162 0 1,055 Not Hispanic 22,254 0 4,771 Table 2 – Table of assistance to racial and ethnic populations by source of funds Narrative The County requests that sub-grantees/subrecipients collect race and ethnicity information using nine different categories in addition to Hispanic ethnicity. The figures above do not take into account mixed- race categories. For a complete view of the race/ethnicity demographic information of the residents/beneficiaries served by the various CDBG/HOME/ESG/HOPWA funded projects and programs, please see the project/program tables in Attachment B. DRAFT CAPER 12 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CR-15 - Resources and Investments 91.520(a) Identify the resources made available Source of Funds Source Resources Made Available Amount Expended During Program Year CDBG public - federal 13,797,003 6,122,986 HOME public - federal 12,845,674 357,080 ESG public - federal 476,650 341,870 Other public - federal 2,024,720 152,674 Table 3 - Resources Made Available Narrative The "Resources Made Available" includes the current year grant allocation, program income, returned or recaptured funds and prior year unexpended funds. The amount expended during program year 2021/22 includes funds expended on completed projects/activities and on projects/activities that are underway but not yet completed. Identify the geographic distribution and location of investments Target Area Planned Percentage of Allocation Actual Percentage of Allocation Narrative Description Contra Costa County 100 100 Countywide Table 4 – Identify the geographic distribution and location of investments Narrative The Contra Costa County HOME Consortium area is comprised of the unincorporated areas and incorporated cities/towns of the County. In terms of geographic distribution of investment of HOME funds, HOME housing activities will go towards all eligible areas of the HOME Consortium area to benefit low-income households. Contra Costa County also receives an allocation of CDBG funds from HUD to benefit residents of the Urban County. The Urban County area is comprised of all the unincorporated areas and incorporated cities/towns of the County, minus the Cities of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg, and Walnut Creek. These four cities receive their own allocation of CDBG funds from HUD and therefore are not part of the Urban County area. In terms of specific geographic distribution of investments, infrastructure improvements and public facilities were focused primarily in areas with concentrations of low- to moderate-income populations within the Urban County area. Investments in CDBG housing activities occur in any Urban County area. Contra Costa County also receives an allocation of ESG funds from HUD. The ESG area for the County is the Urban County area (similar to the County's CDBG Urban County area explained above). In terms of geographic investment of ESG funds, ESG funds were distributed throughout the Urban County to provide assistance to the homeless population or those at risk of becoming homeless who are within the DRAFT CAPER 13 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Urban County area of Contra Costa County. Contra Costa County is also a sub-grantee to the City of Oakland (Alameda County) for the HOPWA program. Contra Costa County's HOPWA area is the entire County unincorporated areas and incorporated cities/towns of the County. Leveraging Explain how federal funds leveraged additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements were satisfied, as well as how any publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that were used to address the needs identified in the plan. For each dollar spent in County federal funds for projects that were completed during the program year, $13.38 was leveraged in other federal, State, local, and private resources. The 100 percent ESG matching requirements were met through other federal (non-ESG), State, local, and private resources. While the 25 percent HOME Program match liability of $13,640 was not met this Fiscal Year, the excess liability from previous Fiscal Years was able to cover the match liability requirement and the current excess match will be carried over for the next federal fiscal year. Fiscal Year Summary – HOME Match 1. Excess match from prior Federal fiscal year 44,799,764 2. Match contributed during current Federal fiscal year 00 3. Total match available for current Federal fiscal year (Line 1 plus Line 2) 44,799,764 4. Match liability for current Federal fiscal year 13,640 5. Excess match carried over to next Federal fiscal year (Line 3 minus Line 4) 44,786,124 Table 5 – Fiscal Year Summary - HOME Match Report DRAFT CAPER 14 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Match Contribution for the Federal Fiscal Year Project No. or Other ID Date of Contribution Cash (non-Federal sources) Foregone Taxes, Fees, Charges Appraised Land/Real Property Required Infrastructur e Site Preparation, Construction Materials, Donated labor Bond Financing Total Match N/A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Table 6 – Match Contribution for the Federal Fiscal Year HOME MBE/WBE report Program Income – Enter the program amounts for the reporting period Balance on hand at begin- ning of reporting period $ Amount received during reporting period $ Total amount expended during reporting period $ Amount expended for TBRA $ Balance on hand at end of reporting period $ 558,689 643,410.25 99,030.77 0 1,103,068 Table 7 – Program Income DRAFT CAPER 15 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Minority Business Enterprises and Women Business Enterprises – Indicate the number and dollar value of contracts for HOME projects completed during the reporting period Total Minority Business Enterprises White Non- Hispanic Alaskan Native or American Indian Asian or Pacific Islander Black Non- Hispanic Hispanic Contracts Dollar Amount 0 0 0 0 0 0 Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub-Contracts Number 0 0 0 0 0 Dollar Amount 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Women Business Enterprises Male Contracts Dollar Amount 0 0 0 Number 0 0 0 Sub-Contracts Number 0 0 0 Dollar Amount 0 0 0 Table 8 – Minority Business and Women Business Enterprises Minority Owners of Rental Property – Indicate the number of HOME-assisted rental property owners and the total amount of HOME funds in these rental properties assisted Total Minority Property Owners White Non- Hispanic Alaskan Native or American Indian Asian or Pacific Islander Black Non- Hispanic Hispanic Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dollar Amount 0 0 0 0 0 0 Table 9 – Minority Owners of Rental Property DRAFT CAPER 16 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Relocation and Real Property Acquisition – Indicate the number of persons displaced, the cost of relocation payments, the number of parcels acquired, and the cost of acquisition Parcels Acquired 0 0 Businesses Displaced 0 0 Nonprofit Organizations Displaced 0 0 Households Temporarily Relocated, not Displaced 0 0 Households Displaced Total Minority Property Enterprises White Non- Hispanic Alaskan Native or American Indian Asian or Pacific Islander Black Non- Hispanic Hispanic Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cost 0 0 0 0 0 0 Table 10 – Relocation and Real Property Acquisition Narrative In Fiscal Year 2021/22, there were no HOME-funded projects that involved the relocation of tenants or businesses. The information in the table above only reflects relocation activities for HOME-funded projects. DRAFT CAPER 17 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CR-20 – Affordable Housing 91.520(b) Evaluation of the jurisdiction’s progress in providing affordable housing, including the number and types of families served, the number of extremely low-income, low- income, moderate-income, and middle-income persons served. One-Year Goal Actual Number of Homeless households to be provided affordable housing units 0 0 Number of Non-Homeless households to be provided affordable housing units 287 57 Number of Special-Needs households to be provided affordable housing units 6 Total 293 57 Table 11 – Number of Households One-Year Goal Actual Number of households supported through Rental Assistance 0 0 Number of households supported through The Production of New Units 31 42 Number of households supported through Rehab of Existing Units 175 15 Number of households supported through Acquisition of Existing Units 87 0 Total 293 57 Table 12 – Number of Households Supported Discuss the difference between goals and outcomes and problems encountered in meeting these goals. During FY 2021/22, Contra Costa continued to make progress toward meeting its affordable housing goals. There are also several developments currently under construction or will be commencing construction in the coming months. In measuring the County’s accomplishments, it must be noted that the majority of funded housing projects are complex, involving new construction or acquisition and rehabilitation of multifamily housing and requiring multiple funding sources. In general, these projects require two to five years from initial development planning to completion and occupancy. In order to facilitate the ability of the project sponsor to obtain additional funding from other sources (e.g., LIHTCs and State programs), the County often conditionally awards resources relatively early in the process. Therefore, the number of units funded and completed with current resources is often less than the number funded and in development. Heritage Point closed out during this fiscal year. Sycamore Place Rehab and Esperanza Place both commenced construction during FY 2021/22. DRAFT CAPER 18 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Discuss how these outcomes will impact future annual action plans. The development schedule of the above-listed projects will not impact future annual action plans. The progress and completion information will be reported in future CAPERs. Include the number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income persons served by each activity where information on income by family size is required to determine the eligibility of the activity. Number of Households Served CDBG Actual HOME Actual Extremely Low-income 15 0 Low-income 18 0 Moderate-income 2 0 Total 35 0 Table 13 – Number of Households Served Narrative Information In FY 2021/22, the following housing activities were accomplished with the disbursement of HOME/CDBG/HOPWA funds: • 7 owner-occupied homes were rehabilitated with CDBG funds as part of the Neighborhood Preservation Program. Of these 7 homeowners, 3 were extremely low-income (30%), 3 were low-income (50%), and 1 was moderate-income (80%). • 2 tenant households occupied newly rehabilitated Richmond Neighborhood Housing Services (RNHS) properties. Both households were extremely low-income. • 42 rental housing units (Heritage Point) were constructed with 20 units that are CDBG-assisted. CR-25 – Homeless and Other Special Needs 91.220(d, e); 91.320(d, e); 91.520(c) Evaluate the jurisdiction’s progress in meeting its specific objectives for reducing and ending homelessness through: Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs The Contra Costa Continuum of Care uses a number of strategies to reach out to unsheltered persons experiencing homelessness and assess their individual needs, including direct outreach and marketing, the use of phone-based services including the 211 line, marketing in other languages (e.g., Spanish), making physical and virtual locations accessible to those with disabilities, and collaborating with local law enforcement. All persons experiencing homelessness who are interested in housing receive a VI-SPDAT (Vulnerability DRAFT CAPER 19 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Index – Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool) assessment, the common assessment tool being used by the Contra Costa Coordinated Entry System to prioritize those with the highest levels of chronicity and acuity for available housing resources and services. Persons are also referred to CARE (Coordinated Assessment Resource) Centers to access services for basic needs, case management, housing navigation, and health care. Outreach Services: As a part of the Contra Costa Coordinated Entry System, CORE (Coordinated Outreach, Referral and Engagement) Teams serve as an entry point into the homeless system of care, providing both day and evening outreach resources and services to encampments and service sites. The outreach teams seek out individuals on the street and in encampments and provide clients with access to food and shelter, and to integrated health, mental health and substance use treatment services. Health Care for the Homeless: In addition to providing direct medical care, testing and immunization services, the County-funded Health Care for the Homeless Program uses its mobile healthcare van for outreach. The bilingual Healthcare for the Homeless Team assesses client’s needs, provides social support, and links clients to appropriate services and programs, including mental health and substance abuse programs, Medi-Cal, the County’s Basic Adult Care program, and the Covered California healthcare insurance exchange. Healthcare for the Homeless also partners closely with the CORE outreach teams to provide care to people without shelter or housing. Impacts of COVID-19: This year during the COVID-19 pandemic, outreach and assessments were severely impacted as it was not physically possible to engage with people experiencing homelessness in the same ways to protect the health and safety of unsheltered and temporarily sheltered clients and homeless services staff. Congregate facilities such as CARE and Warming Centers that are often used by unsheltered persons, were temporarily closed under orders of the County Health Officer. While the County did deploy outreach teams, the type and content of the outreach shifted to include ensuring those who were unsheltered received personal protective equipment, hygiene and sanitation training and supplies, and that necessary resources and services such as food and healthcare access continued with modifications. The County and local governments also provided increased access to handwashing stations, port-o-potties, showers, and laundry. Healthcare for the Homeless mobile services and other mobile services were well suited to adapt to changing conditions and were able to continue service. Other new and continuing mobile services included hygiene stations, portable toilets, handwashing stations, and mobile laundry and shower facilities. In January 2021, as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, the CoC received a waiver to conduct a partial count of unsheltered and sheltered homelessness in the region using unsheltered homelessness data in the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) for the County’s annual homeless Continuum of Care Point-In-Time Count. The County also deployed outreach teams in coordination with Healthcare for the Homeless to identify and rapidly house vulnerable unsheltered persons for immediate non-congregate shelter placement through Project Roomkey. Outreach and Healthcare for the Homeless mobile teams also provided access to COVID-19 rapid testing and vaccinations for unsheltered and temporarily sheltered individuals. DRAFT CAPER 20 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons During calendar year 2020 there were 9,767 people served in programs for people experiencing homelessness (making up 7,365 households). There has been a 5% decrease in the number of households served in programs for people experiencing homelessness. Crisis services, including emergency shelter and transitional housing, are a critical component of the Contra Costa Coordinated Entry System. For individuals and families experiencing a housing crisis that cannot be diverted, CORE Teams and CARE Centers make referrals to over 900 emergency shelter and transitional housing beds throughout Contra Costa County. In keeping with a Housing First approach, the goal of Contra Costa’s crisis response system is to provide immediate and easy access to safe and decent shelter beds, when available, to the most vulnerable unsheltered people, including those that are chronically homeless, with the housing-focused goal of re-housing people as quickly as possible. Contra Costa CoC has established system-level performance measures for emergency shelter, including reducing the average length of stay increasing exits to permanent housing and increasing non- returns to homelessness. For FY 2021/22, CDBG funds were awarded to Concord’s Adult Emergency Shelter to provide shelter and case management services to homeless adults. Upon entry to the shelter, each resident is assigned a case manager to assist the individual in determining an appropriate service plan that will help them regain housing as soon as possible. The shelters are part of Contra Costa County’s Continuum of Care and enables individuals and families the opportunity to work on stabilizing their lives and moving toward a permanent housing solution. HUD CoC Program Funding: Under HUD's 2021 CoC Program NOFA, the County CoC obtained an award $16,296,852, the majority of which supports funding for rental assistance, and housing navigation and placement into permanent and permanent supportive housing for the most vulnerable, including seniors, chronically homeless individuals, and for survivors of domestic violence and their children. County CoC Strategic Plan and System Modeling: In October 2014, the Contra Costa CoC updated its Strategic Plan to End Homelessness. The City’s Housing Manager participated in the updating process as a member of the CoC Board and has served on various CoC subcommittees focused on five key modules: coordinated intake and assessment, performance measurement, prevention services and other supports, housing and communication. The CoC now tracks progress and updates to the Strategic Plan using a driver diagram that outlines the community’s priorities and an annual workplan that aims to reduce inflow and increase outflow using community approved strategies and milestones, which include those five key modules. The priorities and work plan are built on three guiding principles of equity, transparency, and data informed decision making. The strategies were developed and are reviewed using comprehensive data and system modeling that identified system flow and utilization and system program gaps and cost. The system modeling tools and updates to the Strategic Plan, Priorities and Annual Workplan all function to ensure coordination in the community’s approach to ending homelessness, track progress toward those goals, and allow for continuous quality improvement. Impacts of COVID-19: While transportation and indoor congregate shelter facilities were severely limited, the County with support from federal, state, and local funding were able to shift resources to DRAFT CAPER 21 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) make indoor non-congregate facilities (such as hotels under Project Roomkey and Homekey) available to persons most vulnerable to the disease before expanding those services to others. The County continues working with the community, including the Council on Homelessness, to use data driven processes to develop a COVID Recovery Plan, with specific strategies and objectives of reopening shelters safely, leveraging new and existing non-congregate shelters for medium and long term emergency shelter capacity, increasing permanent housing opportunities to reduce emergency shelter utilization and overall homelessness, and coordinating prioritization and system procedures to ensure long-term housing stability and system capacity for disaster and inflow impacts. In 2020 and 2021 the CoC received additional funding to provide rapid rehousing and rental assistance to persons imminently at risk of homelessness and those in unsafe temporary shelter and street settings. As a result, the community revisited its housing strategy by developing and using a housing inventory model, which depicts the needs and gaps in the CoC's housing inventory, including costs of each housing intervention and total cost to meet the total community need. State ESG Funding: The State, in consultation with HUD, redesigned its ESG Program prior to the 2016 Program Year. The redesign intended to accomplish the following: align State ESG with local entities' ESG programs and HUD goals; increase coordination of State ESG investments with local homelessness systems and investments; invest in the most impactful activities, based on key performance goals and outcomes; shift from an intensive provider competition, in which local providers competed for State ESG funds with other local providers and providers throughout the State, to a much more local competition and where the administration of the program is streamlined; and improve geographic distribution of funding. Under this program design, the State established a dedicated CoC allocation and simplified process available to California communities that are able to administer ESG locally. Under this process, eligible local government entities can act as Administrative Entities (AE) of State ESG funds in furtherance of these goals. In 2016, HCD began distributing funding to Continuum of Care Service Areas (or Service Areas) through two allocations: Continuum of Care Allocation for Service Areas that contain a city or county that receives ESG directly from HUD; and the Balance of State Allocation for Service Areas that do not contain a city or county that receives ESG directly from HUD. The County’s Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) receives ESG funds directly from HUD to administer the County’s own ESG Program, so it is an eligible local government entity that can act as an AE of State ESG funds under the State’s program. On March 30, 2016, the State approved DCD as an AE to administer State ESG funds on behalf of the State for the County’s CoC Service Area, which includes all of Contra Costa County, with emphasis toward households/residents of the cities of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg, and Walnut Creek, as required by the State ESG regulations. The other cities in the County, including Richmond, are part of the Urban County and are therefore served the County’s direct ESG grant. DRAFT CAPER 22 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low-income individuals and families and those who are: likely to become homeless after being discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities, mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and institutions); and, receiving assistance from public or private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education, or youth needs The Contra Costa CoC has implemented a triage tool used by 211 and other crisis service entry points into our system to identify clients on the brink of homelessness and connect them to prevention, mainstream services, and diversion services. In 2019 the CoC also implemented rapid resolution services to assist clients at the system access points move towards early alternate stable housing options and reduce inflow and length of time in the homeless system. In 2020 rapid resolution services, which also includes landlord-tenant mediation, was scaled to allow all service providers to use those strategies to help clients at any stage. Rapid Resolution services have also been paired successfully with the CoC’s flexible housing pool (Housing Security Fund), to provide financial assistance that may be necessary to secure those alternate housing options, including short term rental assistance and utility arrears. Clients are connected to prevention services throughout the County’s Coordinated entry system via the telephonic system (211) and also connect directly to several other prevention providers. 956 households were served in prevention programs during calendar year 2020. More than three-quarters (78%) of people in prevention programming exited to permanent housing; 10% of households in prevention programing exited to a temporary setting; 1% exited to homelessness. Work is currently underway to enhance integrations of prevention and diversion services into the homeless CoC, including use of coordinated entry system, data collection and storage, broader access among providers and populations to the local flexible housing use fund, and potentially a regional approach to prevention services and funding. Season of Sharing provides $900k annually in temporary financial assistance (emergency rent payments, utilities, & other aids to prevent homelessness) for families in crisis. Discharge planning w/hospitals, mental health, substance abuse treatment, corrections & foster care systems also help to reduce first time homelessness. Federal Emergency Solutions Grants and Supportive Services for Veteran Families funding are also available in the County and accessible through 211 to provide prevention and rental assistance support to persons at risk of homelessness. There is significant cross system collaboration including with hospitals and clinics, Department of Probation, law enforcement, and the Office of the Public Defender. H3 and other CoC partner agencies work closely with those systems, agencies and the County Employment and Human Services Department to ensure affordable housing and social services are available to individuals who are at risk of discharge into homelessness or unstable housing. H3 is working to strengthen other partnerships and collaborative projects, including with foster care system and workforce development services. CORE outreach teams are often bridging across these systems on the ground and working closely with a variety of providers to connect vulnerable populations to the available resources. DRAFT CAPER 23 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Veterans: In cooperation with the local VA, Contra Costa’s CoC has worked to increase its capacity to house and serve homeless veterans, including the distribution of HUD-VASH vouchers and rental assistance for permanent housing units provided to homeless veterans and their families under the Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) program. Reducing Recidivism: The Contra Costa County’s Health Services Department has integrated the County’s Mental Health, Alcohol and Other Drug Services and Homeless Programs into a single Behavioral Health Division that is able to address the mental health and substance abuse issues that are common barriers to long-term housing success for homeless individuals and families. Impacts of COVID-19 pandemic: The CoC used system modeling and Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) data to identify any additional needs and costs of homelessness prevention and rapid resolution services in light of the pandemic and local factors, including the County -wide eviction moratorium. The CoC convened a series of public meetings during which a working group of the Council on Homelessness made recommendations in line with State and Federal funding and policy guidance to target resources toward permanent housing solutions, medium and long-term rental assistance, and emergency shelter in response to the pandemic. Local CDBG funding specific to coronavirus relief was allocated for homeless prevention services. Private funding was also used to supplement CoC funding to support homeless services providers and increase the capacity of the system to serve persons during the pandemic. Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again In sum, 11% of households accessing crisis response during 2020 (N=887) exited to Permanent Housing; 81 of those households were housed in RRH, 657 in housing with other type of subsidy, and 149 housed without a subsidy. The Contra Costa CoC uses the VI-SPDAT (which includes length of homelessness as measure of vulnerability) to help prioritize the most vulnerable people for available Permanent Supportive Housing. This process is used to prioritize individuals and families for Rapid Rehousing and permanent housing options, including Permanent Supportive Housing for individuals and families with high needs. Available housing is also prioritized for persons who have been homeless longest. The CoC and homeless services providers are committed to reducing length of time persons are homeless by reducing barriers to housing and services using a Housing First approach. The CoC also uses a robust housing navigation program to get people housing ready, obtain income, and obtain permanent housing placements in the community. 351 households were served in Housing Navigation during the 2020 calendar year. The CoC uses various data metrics to track, monitor and support decision making around homeless services and housing funding and policy. CoC-wide performance measures, tracked in HMIS, include reducing the average length of stay in emergency shelters, tracking chronicity, and number of DRAFT CAPER 24 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) permanent housing exits. The CoC has recently used system modeling to help identify strategies to right size the system and maximize existing resources, so more resources would be available to more people to promote faster more stable housing placements. However, Contra Costa’s biggest challenge to reducing length of time homeless is lack of affordable housing stock and permanent ongoing funding to support stable housing in our high cost area for low, very low and extremely low income households. Chronically Homeless: Chronically homeless consumers are generally the most difficult to move from the streets and back into housing. The county tracks chronicity in a By-Name List. One-third (34%) of households were chronically homeless. Chronic homelessness has increased 211% in five years (from 803 households in 15-16 to 2,496 households in 19-20). This large in-flow and low housing placements results in an increasing number on the monthly Chronic By-Name List. Despite the challenges in reaching and housing this population, local outreach teams and care providers continue to successfully engage with the chronically homeless population to begin the process of establishing and maintaining stable housing. In FY19/20 the County continued using funding from the HUD CoC-funded County project for High Utilizers of Multiple Systems (HUMS) pending the construction of microunits for the project participants. This allowed for chronically homeless high needs individuals to benefit from stable permanent housing even before the project building was complete. Families with Children: Families with Children: In Contra Costa County, 1028 households were families with children in calendar year 2020; the number of family households has decreased by 2% since 2018. Families experiencing a housing crisis who cannot be diverted are connected to crisis services and assessed for permanent housing using the Family VI-SPDAT. Using a Housing First approach, the CE Manager makes referrals to services and housing based on the prioritization to ensure the most vulnerable are first matched to resources that meet their needs. As of FY19/20 there are three large Rapid Rehousing projects dedicated to families with children. One of which, in partnership with the Employment and Human Services Department, functions as a primary method of ensuring families of color with children are housed at rates that exceed the proportion of people of color in the population while simultaneously operating as one of the highest performing projects in the system of care with fast placements and high housing stability rates. Veterans: Veteran households made up 8% of the population served in calendar year 2020. Veterans made up more than one third of the persons in permanent supportive housing and had the highest rate of exit to permanent housing than any other subgroup. As part of our involvement in the Built For Zero campaign, the Contra Costa CoC focused on improving connections between the Veteran and homeless systems of care by facilitating data sharing between programs to better assess the number of veterans being housed each month in the community. All CoC program-funded providers, including outreach teams, assess veteran eligibility using a standardized HMIS intake form and qualifying clients are referred to veteran services using the coordinated entry system and HMIS database. The CoC also uses a veterans "by name" list to identify veterans who are not yet connected to housing and to center monthly housing placement committee meetings with veteran providers on the needs and options for housing and services on those specific veterans. Unaccompanied Youth: When foster youth age out of the foster care system, the County links them to the Independent Living Skills Program (ILSP). ILSP includes workshops that prepare youth for emancipation (money management, education, computer skills, home management, and social skills), DRAFT CAPER 25 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) employment assistance, non-McKinney-Vento housing and retention services, and an individualized transition plan out of foster care. Reentry Population: Over the past two years, the CoC has developed and scaled multiple projects with criminal justice system agencies to connect people reentering the community after incarceration, with prevention and rapid resolution services, specialized housing navigation services and housing. The CoC also has a seat on the Council on Homelessness dedicated to criminal justice partners to ensure adequate consideration of the needs of this population and to enhance the system of care. Impacts of COVID-19: The County used Federal and State guidance, including Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) eligibility criteria to rapidly place and transition the most vulnerable populations, including chronically homeless, the elderly, and families at high risk of infection, into shelter environments, such as hotels. As part of the County’s COVID-19 Response Strategy, those individuals were also prioritized for rapid housing exits to ensure safe and stable permanent housing was available to those homeless individuals to further prevent the spread of coronavirus. As part of the County’s ongoing COVID-19 Recovery Plan, the County is working with multiple local partners, including the City of Concord, to plan for transitioning individuals in the noncongregate shelters to safe temporary and permanent placements once the federal FEMA and State Project Roomkey funding expires. CR-30 - Public Housing 91.220(h); 91.320(j) Actions taken to address the needs of public housing Housing Authority of the County of Contra Costa (HACCC) has begun a long-term project to reposition and rehabilitate its public housing portfolio in the face of ever-decreasing federal, state and local funding. The initial step in this process was the disposition via RAD of the agency’s Las Deltas public housing property in North Richmond. HACCC received approval from HUD to move forward with the RAD conversion of this property. The public housing subsidies received for the 214 units at Las Deltas will be converted to RAD project-based voucher assistance at eleven new or rehabilitated housing developments throughout the County. The units at Las Deltas help produce at least 502 units of new or rehabilitated affordable housing throughout the County. Of this total, 125 of the units, to date, will be funded directly with the RAD project-based vouchers received for Las Deltas, 161 will be funded with "regular" project-based vouchers from the housing authority’s existing funding and 216 will be funded using other affordable housing funds. An additional 89 units are to be committed to other RAD transactions or replaced through the HUD Demolition and Disposition process that will result in at least another 89 units of funding for voucher replacement units and likely more units leveraged for further project-based voucher assistance HACCC budgeted $2,820,000 of HUD funding to include the following improvements: • $600,000 - Replacement of select roofs at the Bayo Vista development. • $327,000 – Repair and conversion of the electrical infrastructure at the Alhambra Terrace DRAFT CAPER 26 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) development. • $292,000 - Phase 1 modernization of the Alhambra Terrace development. • $168,000 - Security window and door covers for vacant units at the Las Deltas development. • $162,000 – Boiler replacement at the Hacienda development. • $100,000 – Elevator modernization at the Elder Winds development. • $30,000 – Roof refurbishing at the Kidd Manor development. • $160,000 - Computer upgrades. • $55,000 – Demolition of the former day care building at the Las Deltas development. • $50,000 - Concrete flatwork repairs at various developments. • $28,000 - Replace refrigerators, ranges, and other dwelling equipment. • $27,000 - Relocation costs - RAD Actions taken to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in homeownership HACCC holds quarterly meetings/social events at seven public housing properties. Tenants from nearby properties also attend these events. This year due to COVID-19 we only held two back to school gatherings at the Bayo Vista property and El Pueblo. Backpack and school supplies were given to school- age children at these properties. Free lunch programs are operated at Bayo Vista and Vista Del Camino housing developments. HACCC participates in the Campaign for Grade Level Reading and the HACCC provides children’s books to families at public housing sites. HACCC partnered with Pittsburg Police Department and the Sheriff’s Department to provide Thanksgiving and Christmas meals to residents in the El Pueblo and Bayo Vista developments. HACCC partnered with Supervisor Glover’s office to distribute turkeys for Thanksgiving to residents in Bayo Vista, Hacienda and Casa Serena. HACCC continues to expand partnerships with law enforcement in East County, by installing camera system at Elderwinds, Bridgemont and Casa Del Rio properties in Antioch. Antioch Police Department will monitor each property from a law enforcement perspective and provide HACCC with access any footage of crimes at properties. For the last few years, the Bay Area Medical Group has provided the Bayo Vista Community medical service on site. Staff is meeting regularly with elderly and disabled residents to better determine their service needs. The Resident Advisory Board met four times this year to discuss HACCC policies. Their input will be used to craft the Agency’s next Annual Plan. Actions taken to provide assistance to troubled PHAs Not applicable. HACCC is not designated as troubled. DRAFT CAPER 27 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CR-35 - Other Actions 91.220(j)-(k); 91.320(i)-(j) Actions taken to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment. 91.220 (j); 91.320 (i) The County will continue its efforts to remove or ameliorate public policies which negatively impact affordable housing development in the County including the following: • Through the County Density Bonus Ordinance and the State’s Density Bonus Statute, an application for a housing development may request a density bonus if they seek and agree to construct on-site affordable housing. Both state and local laws regarding residential density bonus require the County to grant a bonus in residential density on a site if a certain percentage of units in the project are affordable. The affordability of the units is deed restricted and runs with the land. The density bonus that is granted varies depending on the affordability levels of the units based on the area median income (AMI) of the affordable units. Units proposed at 30% AMI, 50% AMI, 80% AMI, or 120% AMI all have differing levels of density bonus. A project’s location to transit the proposal of a childcare facility on-site, and other factors may also increase the number of incentives, concessions, or density bonus for the project. • Through the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, the County requires all developers of five or more residential units to provide 15 percent of the units at affordable costs to moderate, lower, or very low-income households depending on the type of project. Developers may pay a fee in lieu of providing affordable units if the project is 125 residential units or less. • Through the Farmworker Housing Ordinance, the County has established requirements and standards for housing accommodations for five or more farmworkers and established ministerial review and discretionary review processes for different housing accommodation types. Housing accommodations for four or fewer farmworkers are not regulated separately by the County Zoning Code, but must comply with all zoning requirements of the zoning district where the housing accommodations are located. • Through the Accessory Dwelling Units Ordinance, the County has authorized accessory dwelling units, including junior accessory dwelling units, and established procedures for reviewing and approving their development to ensure healthy and safe residential living environments, established location and development standards, and require ministerial review of their proposed development. Actions taken to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs. 91.220(k); 91.320(j) The County’s efforts to increase and maintain the supply of affordable housing, and to meet the objectives identified in the Consolidated Plan, described in the general narrative sections of this report, are all directed to meeting underserved needs. In addition, the criteria for target population and alleviation of affordable housing needs employed in the allocation of HOME and CDBG funds for DRAFT CAPER 28 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) housing, establish a priority for projects that reserve a portion of the units for extremely low-income and/or special needs populations. The following are obstacles to meeting needs of the underserved: Accessibility to Services: Lack of accessibility to services can be the result of lack of transportation for those in need, services that are not delivered in a culturally appropriate manner or in the appropriate language, burdensome prerequisites to accessing services (“red tape”), and services that are not provided in proximity to those in need. Lack of transportation is a particular challenge for those who do not drive, do not have a car, or are elderly and for persons with disabilities. Most if not all the public service projects listed in AP-38 are located within the neighborhoods or communities of the target population to provide easy accessibility to their services. Some of the public service projects serving the elderly or persons with disabilities provide transportation to their services or provide "in-home" services. Awareness of Services: The lack of awareness of the availability of services by those in need and a lack of knowledge about how to access services are significant obstacles to the provision of services. All agencies receiving CDBG, HOME, ESG, or HOPWA funds from the County must provide significant outreach to those in need. County DCD staff continues to monitor CDBG/HOME/ESG/HOPWA-funded agencies to verify if an agency’s outreach is adequate and that outreach materials are available in various languages. Coordination of Services: Those in need often access services from several points; similar services may also be provided by more than one agency. Those being served by one agency may have needs that are not being addressed by the particular agency currently serving that person or family. County DCD staff advocates that CDBG/HOME/ESG/HOPWA-funded agencies collaborate and coordinate with other agencies in the community or serving their target population. DCD staff continue to encourage agencies to collaborate and coordinate to avoid duplication and to provide more efficient services to their clients or target populations. Resources: Resources are generally less than required to meet the level of need. The CDBG/HOME/ESG/HOPWA funds that are available are prioritized to the high Priority Needs and Goals established in the 2020-2025 Consolidated Plan. Funding is also prioritized for those undertakings that represent the most efficient use of funds, are delivered by the most qualified persons, and serve the broadest area. Actions taken to reduce lead-based paint hazards. 91.220(k); 91.320(j) The County has incorporated the requirements of the lead-based paint regulations (24 CFR PART 35) into its affected programs, including the homeowner and rental rehabilitation programs. These programs developed implementation plans that include procedures to test for lead-based paint, determine a scope of work to address lead-based paint hazards, ensure qualified contractors are performing the required work, and obtain a clearance examination at project completion. DRAFT CAPER 29 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Additionally, the County’s Neighborhood Preservation Program, a home rehabilitation program, provides grants to homeowners who have received rehabilitation loans and need to abate lead hazards. Actions taken to reduce the number of poverty-level families. 91.220(k); 91.320(j) The movement of people to above the poverty line involves a variety of policies and programs that extend beyond providing opportunities for employment at a living wage. Access to education, transportation, childcare, and housing are also key components that can assist persons to secure and retain economically self-sustaining employment. The County employs a variety of strategies to help alleviate poverty in the Urban County, including efforts to stimulate economic growth and job opportunities, and to provide Urban County residents with the skills and abilities required to take advantage of those opportunities. In FY 2021/22, the CDBG program provided funds for three job training and placement programs: • Opportunity Junction’s Bay Point Career Development Services program (21-29-ED) and Job Training and Placement program (21-36-ED) provided personalized vocational training and job placement for persons to establish careers in information technology and office administration. • Multicultural Institute’s Lifeskills/Day Labor program (21-32-ED) provided job-matching, individualized assistance with health, legal and educational needs. In FY 2021/22, the CDBG program provided funds for a number of programs that do not aid in employment, but are crucial to the reduction of poverty: • Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity’s Tenant-Landlord Housing Services Collaboration program (21-28-PS) provided information and counseling to County tenants on their housing rights. • CocoKids Road to Success program (21-35-ED) provided microenterprise assistance to low- income residents seeking to start or maintain licensed home-based family child care businesses. • The City of Lafayette’s Lamorinda Spirit Van Senior Transportation Program (21-13-PS) provided transportation to the elderly so that they may maintain their normal lifestyle and age in their homes. • Mount Diablo Unified School District’s CARES After School Enrichment Program (21-24-PS) provided after-school childcare and enrichment to elementary and middle school students. Actions taken to develop institutional structure. 91.220(k); 91.320(j) DCD continues to provide technical assistance to non-profits to build capacity and assist in the development of programs and projects designed to meet the County’s Consolidated Plan objectives through individual meetings and workshops held during the program year. Further, the Department works with non-profits to achieve designation as a Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) and/or Community Based Development Organization (CBDO) for purposes of participating in the Consortium HOME and County CDBG affordable housing programs. DRAFT CAPER 30 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Actions taken to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies. 91.220(k); 91.320(j) The County’s efforts to coordinate activities and strategies for affordable housing development and the provision of emergency and transitional housing and supportive services included cooperative planning efforts as well as participation in a number of countywide housing and service provider organizations. Planning efforts undertaken during FY 2021/22 included the following: • Contra Costa Consortium members continued to work on strategies and actions designed to overcome identified impediments and eliminate problems of housing discrimination in Contra Costa. • The Continuum of Care and the Council on Homelessness worked with Contra Costa jurisdictions, public and private agencies, the interfaith community, homeless advocacy groups, and other community organizations to implement the Continuum of Care Plan, which includes strategies and programs designed to alleviate homelessness, and the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness. • In addition to the above, the County participated in a number of countywide housing and service provider organizations, which are intended to share resources and coordinate strategies and programs for affordable housing and community development activities. Identify actions taken to overcome the effects of any impediments identified in the jurisdiction’s analysis of impediments to fair housing choice. 91.520(a) Urban County staff, along with staff from the other Contra Costa CDBG entitlement jurisdictions (Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg, and Walnut Creek), worked together to prepare the Contra Costa Consortium Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI). This document outlines and identifies barriers to fair housing and presents a plan to properly navigate them. An update of the AI was completed and approved by each Contra Costa CDBG entitlement jurisdiction in 2019. The AI is effective from July 1, 2020, to June 30, 2025, and is available on the County website at: http://www.contracostaca.gov/CDBG To address impediments identified in the study, the AI offers the following set of goals and actions . Recommendation #1: Increase available financial resources for affordable housing to better fund efforts to foster stable residential integration and increased access to opportunity. i. Explore a countywide affordable housing bond issuance that includes efforts to develop permanent supportive housing, to build affordable housing for families, and to preserve affordable housing in areas undergoing gentrification and displacement. Efforts to support a bond issue could include the posting of informational materials regarding the need for affordable housing and the possible uses of bond proceedings on government agency websites. ii. If bond does not pass, consider other sources for a County-wide housing trust fund. DRAFT CAPER 31 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Recommendation #2 Provide for the production of additional affordable housing through market incentives and improvements. i. Promote market-rate housing to include affordable units, such as by promoting use of density bonuses. ii. Explore the production of units that are affordable by design, such as Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and micro-units. iii. Evaluate options for streamline processing of affordable housing developments. Recommendation #3: Increase residential racial and ethnic integration by increasing the supply of affordable housing for families in high-opportunity areas. i. Discourage or eliminate live/work preferences in inclusionary ordinances. ii. Coordinate the use of housing subsidies such as Project-Based Vouchers and RAD transfers of assistance with emerging opportunities to build or access affordable housing in high-opportunity areas (such as new bond measures or LIHTC development), to increase access to designated opportunity areas with low poverty rates, healthy neighborhoods, and high-performing schools among subsidized households. iii. Consider any affordable housing funding sources (including new sources such as bond funds) that create balance in the location of affordable housing throughout the county by supporting the creation of affordable units, particularly for families, in high-opportunity areas. Recommendation #4: Increase the supply of permanent supportive housing for people with disabilities and services for people with disabilities. i. To the extent practicable, use affordable housing funds to construct permanent supportive housing in developments in which 10-25% of units are set aside for persons with disabilities. Affirmatively market units to individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities, their families, and service providers, such as the Regional Center of the East Bay. ii. Explore methods for nonprofit partners to assist in purchasing or master leasing affordable units within inclusionary market-rate developments, and set a portion of those units aside for persons with disabilities. iii. Explore funding options for continuing community-based services for possible expansion of services, particularly for persons with psychiatric disabilities. Recommendation #5: Reduce housing discrimination and discriminatory barriers to residential mobility. i. Educate landlords on criminal background screening in rental housing (using HUD fair housing guidance) and explore the feasibility of adopting ordinances. ii. Develop and disseminate a best practices guide to credit screening in the rental housing context to discourage the use of strict FICO score cut-offs and overreliance on eviction records. iii. Develop and distribute informational brochure on inclusionary leasing practices, including with licenses where applicable. iv. Increase outreach to LGBTQ and immigrant stakeholder groups to provide “know your rights” materials regarding housing discrimination. DRAFT CAPER 32 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) v. Continue and increase outreach and education activities for all protected classes. vi. Include education on new requirements of the Right to a Safe Home Act in outreach activities to both landlords and the public. vii. For publicly-supported housing, develop protocols to ensure responsiveness to reasonable accommodation requests. Recommendation #6: Address barriers to mobility for families and individuals in publicly-supported housing, including Housing Choice Voucher participants. i. Provide mobility counseling and updated briefing materials to families with or eligible for Housing Choice Vouchers, including about healthy neighborhoods and high-performing, low- poverty schools. ii. Provide block grants or other funding for security deposits (including for voucher holders). iii. Require developers to affirmatively market affordable units (especially in opportunity areas) to voucher holders throughout the county. iv. Implement measures to address sources of income discrimination against Housing Choice Voucher participants and landlord reluctance to participate in the HCV program, including increased landlord support and contact, production of an owner’s packet, and outreach and education (including workshops). Recommendation #7: Reduce the displacement of low-income communities of color by enhancing protections for vulnerable tenants and homeowners and preserving affordable housing in areas that are gentrifying or at risk of gentrification. i. Explore the development of displacement mitigation or replacement requirements for any rezoning activities that could displace existing residents. ii. Explore the feasibility of adopting tenant protections, such as relocation costs, increased noticing, just cause, and rent control ordinances (as permitted by state law), to cover the unincorporated areas of the County and the Cities of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg, and Walnut Creek. iii. Continue funding and support multi-agency collaborative efforts for legal services, including organizations that do not receive Legal Services Corporation funding and are able to represent undocumented residents. iv. In tandem with investments in affordable housing development in low-poverty areas, provide funds for the preservation of affordable housing in areas that are undergoing gentrification or are at risk of gentrification, particularly in areas of high environmental health. v. Encourage the donation of municipally-owned, tax-foreclosed properties to non-profit community land trusts to be rehabilitated, as needed, and preserved for long-term affordable housing. Recommendation #8: Increase access to opportunity through targeted public investments and efforts to increase economic mobility within Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs). DRAFT CAPER 33 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) i. Prioritize economic development expenditures in and around R/ECAPs including through the Northern Waterfront Economic Development Initiative. ii. Prioritize funding for job training activities in and around R/ECAPs including for the types of industrial jobs created through the Northern Waterfront Economic Development Initiative. iii. Prioritize infrastructure and streetscaping improvements in R/ECAPs in order to facilitate local retail development. iv. Engage with small business incubators, like West Contra Costa Small Business Incubator or the Richmond Commercial Kitchen, to expand to R/ECAPs within Contra Costa County or to provide technical assistance to start-up incubators within the County. v. Explore methods for providing low-interest loans and below-market leases for tax-foreclosed commercial properties to low-income residents seeking to start businesses within R/ECAPs. Recommendation #9: Increase and stabilize access to proficient schools. i. Create regular lines of communication between PHAs and staff with county and district school boards and school district staff to ensure that districts take into account the needs of low- income residents in redistricting and investment decisions, particularly for residents of public and assisted housing in the region. ii. To the extent possible, focus on the development of new family affordable housing in school districts and school zones with lower rates of school-based poverty concentration, and incentivize new market-rate multifamily development in high-performing school zones to include more bedrooms in affordable apartments for families with children. Recommendation #10: Increase coordination of housing and environmental health planning to support access to healthy homes and neighborhoods. i. Expand ongoing interagency connections to support weatherization, energy efficiency, and climate adaptation for low-income residents. Recommendation #11: Improve inter-jurisdictional coordination. i. Explore an ongoing working group of representatives from Consortium, PHA, and local housing and community development staff, along with representatives of local and regional transportation, education, climate/energy, and health agencies. DRAFT CAPER 34 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CR-40 - Monitoring 91.220 and 91.230 Describe the standards and procedures used to monitor activities carried out in furtherance of the plan and used to ensure long-term compliance with requirements of the programs involved, including minority business outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements The County Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) is responsible for the administration of the following federally funded programs: CDBG, HOME, NSP, ESG, and HOPWA. All projects funded through these programs are monitored by DCD to ensure that the projects achieve their approved objectives in a manner consistent with federal regulations, the Consolidated Plan, and other local planning requirements. DCD's monitoring process consists of the following: • Prior to funding consideration, all project applications are reviewed to ensure consistency with federal regulations, Board of Supervisor policy, the Consolidated Plan, the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (if applicable), and the County Housing Element (if applicable). • All project sponsors receiving an allocation of CDBG, HOME, NSP, HOPWA, and/or ESG funds are required to enter into Project Agreements which specify project objectives, the scope of work, eligible activities, performance targets, project budget, implementation time frame, federal regulatory requirements, and monitoring and reporting requirements. • During project implementation, project sponsors are required to submit periodic progress reports detailing project progress, significant problems encountered (and their resolution), project funding and expenditures, affirmative marketing activity, and quantitative participation data that illustrates findings on the amount of outreach to women and minority-owned businesses. In addition, projects are monitored as applicable for compliance with federal accounting and procurement standards, labor and construction standards, relocation, affirmative marketing, equal opportunity, fair housing, and other federal requirements. • Following project completion, project sponsors are required to submit Project Completion Reports identifying: project accomplishments; population served, including data on household characteristics (e.g., income, ethnicity); rent and/or housing affordability; and total sources and uses of funds. Affordable housing development projects (e.g., acquisition, rehabilitation, new construction) must also submit annual compliance reports designed to ensure continued compliance with federal regulations, affordability and use restrictions, and other requirements as specified in the project loan documents. In addition, all HOME-assisted projects are subject to periodic onsite inspections to ensure continued compliance with the local housing code. DRAFT CAPER 35 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Citizen Participation Plan 91.105(d); 91.115(d) Describe the efforts to provide citizens with reasonable notice and an opportunity to comment on performance reports. Contra Costa County set a minimum 15-day comment period for citizen participation and to receive comments on the CAPER. Notices announcing the public hearing date to consider acceptance of the CAPER are posted in local newspapers, as well as the County website at least 15 days prior to the public hearing date. A notice announcing the draft of the CAPER and the public hearing date for the CAPER was published on the County website and in the Contra Costa Times on September 4, 2022. The County’s Board of Supervisors accepted the FY 2021/22 CAPER at its September 20, 2022, meeting. There were (number to be added after meeting) public comments received prior to or at the September 20, 2022, Board of Supervisors meeting. The draft CAPER was made available for review at the County’s Department of Conservation and Development office, and on the following website: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/CDBG. DRAFT CAPER 36 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CR-45 - CDBG 91.520(c) Specify the nature of, and reasons for, any changes in the jurisdiction’s program objectives and indications of how the jurisdiction would change its programs as a result of its experiences. The County does not anticipate changing any of its program objectives at this time. Does this Jurisdiction have any open Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) grants? No. [BEDI grantees] Describe accomplishments and program outcomes during the last year. N/A. DRAFT CAPER 37 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CR-50 - HOME 91.520(d) Include the results of on-site inspections of affordable rental housing assisted under the program to determine compliance with housing codes and other applicable regulations Please list those projects that should have been inspected on-site this program year based upon the schedule in §92.504(d). Indicate which of these were inspected and a summary of issues that were detected during the inspection. For those that were not inspected, please indicate the reason and how you will remedy the situation. Effective January 24, 2015, participating jurisdictions are now required to inspect rental projects funded with HOME funds at least once every three years during the required period of affordability. DCD staff monitors units in one of the three regions of the County (East, Central, and West) each year. Staff inspects 15 percent, or no fewer than four, of the HOME-assisted units for each monitored project. Copies of the inspection reports are maintained at the DCD offices. During FY 2021/22, the County performed on-site physical inspections of 16 projects and 83 units . Concurrent with the on-site physical inspections, DCD staff inspects tenant files to ensure the management company complies with the HOME program and local County requirements. The review includes income certifications, rent and utility allowance calculations, appropriate tenant lease provisions, and the annual project audit and operating budget. For all projects with failed units, the County works with the owner and property management company to bring the unit into compliance within 30 days. The following table summarizes the on-site physical inspections completed during the fiscal year: Project Name # of Units Inspected # of Units Passed # of Units Failed Acalanes Court 4 0 4 Arboleda 4 4 0 Belle Terre 4 4 0 Berrellesa Palms 4 4 0 Caldera Place 4 4 0 Coggins Square 8 7 1 Lakeside 10 2 8 Montego Place 4 4 0 Monteverde Senior 7 7 0 Pinecrest 3 2 1 Riley Court 4 1 3 St. Paul’s Commons 5 4 1 Terrace Glen 4 4 0 Valley Vista Senior Housing 8 8 0 Villa Vasconcellos 6 6 0 Virginia Lane 4 3 1 Table 14 - HOME On-Site Inspection DRAFT CAPER 38 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Provide an assessment of the jurisdiction’s affirmative marketing actions for HOME units. 92.351(b) The objective of affirmative marketing is to promote equal access to housing by all groups within the market area. The County has adopted the following policies and measures: Information concerning the availability of funding, housing opportunities, fair housing, and affirmative marketing requirements will be distributed to the general public; all jurisdictions and housing agencies located in the County; property owners and developers of affordable housing; and minority and public interest groups. Notices of funds available are posted on the County website at http://www.contracosta.ca.gov/CDBG Informational material describing the HOME, CDBG, and HOPWA Programs is available at http://www.contracosta.ca.gov/aff-hsg-dev (for developers) http://www.contracosta.ca.gov/affordablehousing (for consumers). The County will maintain records concerning the above activities, including copies of press releases, affirmative marketing materials distributed, and workshops and meetings held with the above groups and organizations. The County requires owners of federally assisted housing to comply with federal fair housing law and employ the following affirmative marketing activities: • Advertise the availability of assisted units in local newspapers and newsletters, such as those published by minority groups, neighborhood churches, public service organizations, etc.; and on bulletin boards in community gathering spots (e.g., community center, church, supermarket, laundromat, fair housing/housing counseling agency, and employment offices). • Contact appropriate community organizations and representatives of minority and other disadvantaged groups to solicit tenants and provide information about the availability of the assisted units. • Display the Equal Housing Opportunity logo at the project location and in all advertisements pertaining to assisted units. Refer to IDIS reports to describe the amount and use of program income for projects, including the number of projects and owner and tenant characteristics The amount of HOME program income (PI) received in FY 2021/22 was $643,410.25 . The amount of HOME PI used on projects during FY 2021/22 was $99,030 , which includes PI from previous years. The PI was expended for HOME Program Administration. The unexpended PI funds will be allocated to a housing development project during the FY 2022/23 Action Plan cycle. DRAFT CAPER 39 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Describe other actions taken to foster and maintain affordable housing. 91.220(k) (STATES ONLY: Including the coordination of LIHTC with the development of affordable housing). 91.320(j) Market factors such as the high cost of land suitable for residential development and unprecedented high construction costs continue to be significant constraints on the development of affordable housing in Contra Costa. The County attempts to counter these factors with strategies and subsidy programs to develop affordable rental housing and homeownership opportunities, for example: • The County applied for and received State Local Early Action Plan (LEAP) Grant funds to initiate new housing programs. • The County applied for and received Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) grant funds to support the new construction of affordable rental units. • The County applied for the Local Housing Trust Fund matching grant through the state. • Behavioral Health Services is the lead County department to apply to State of California No Place Like Home funds (both competitive and non-competitive funds) for permanent supportive housing development. • The County has a multifamily housing revenue bond program that allows developers to finance projects at tax-exempt rates and access 4% Low Income Housing Tax Credits. • The County has a density bonus ordinance to permit increased densities for housing developments that include units affordable to low-income households. • The County adopted an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance which requires developers to provide 15 percent of the units as affordable to moderate, low, or very low-income households. Discussion regarding the County’s efforts to affirmatively further fair housing can be found in Section CR-35. DRAFT CAPER 40 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CR-60 - ESG 91.520(g) (ESG Recipients only) ESG Supplement to the CAPER in e-snaps For Paperwork Reduction Act 1. Recipient Information—All Recipients Complete Basic Grant Information Recipient Name CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Organizational DUNS Number 139441955 EIN/TIN Number 946000509 Identify the Field Office SAN FRANCISCO Identify CoC(s) in which the recipient or subrecipient(s) will provide ESG assistance Richmond/Contra Costa County CoC ESG Contact Name Prefix Mr First Name Gabriel Middle Name Last Name Lemus Suffix Title Assistant Deputy Director ESG Contact Address Street Address 1 Department of Conservation and Development Street Address 2 30 Muir Road City Martinez State CA ZIP Code - Phone Number 9256552885 Extension Fax Number Email Address gabriel.lemus@dcd.cccounty.us ESG Secondary Contact Prefix First Name Last Name Suffix Title Phone Number Extension Email Address 2. Reporting Period—All Recipients Complete Program Year Start Date 07/01/2021 Program Year End Date 06/30/2022 DRAFT CAPER 41 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) 3a. Subrecipient Form – Complete one form for each subrecipient Subrecipient or Contractor Name City State Zip Code DUNS Number Is subrecipient a victim services provider Subrecipient Organization Type ESG Subgrant or Contract Award Amount DRAFT CAPER 42 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CR-65 - Persons Assisted 4. Persons Served 4a. Complete for Homelessness Prevention Activities Number of Persons in Households Total Adults 0 Children 0 Don't Know/Refused/Other 0 Missing Information 0 Total 0 Table 16 – Household Information for Homeless Prevention Activities 4b. Complete for Rapid Re-Housing Activities Number of Persons in Households Total Adults 0 Children 0 Don't Know/Refused/Other 0 Missing Information 0 Total 0 Table 17 – Household Information for Rapid Re-Housing Activities 4c. Complete for Shelter Number of Persons in Households Total Adults 0 Children 0 Don't Know/Refused/Other 0 Missing Information 0 Total 0 Table 18 – Shelter Information 4d. Street Outreach Number of Persons in Households Total Adults 0 Children 0 Don't Know/Refused/Other 0 Missing Information 0 Total 0 DRAFT CAPER 43 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Table 19 – Household Information for Street Outreach 4e. Totals for all Persons Served with ESG Number of Persons in Households Total Adults 0 Children 0 Don't Know/Refused/Other 0 Missing Information 0 Total 0 Table 20 – Household Information for Persons Served with ESG 5. Gender—Complete for All Activities Total Male 0 Female 0 Transgender 0 Don't Know/Refused/Other 0 Missing Information 0 Total 0 Table 21 – Gender Information 6. Age—Complete for All Activities Total Under 18 0 18-24 0 25 and over 0 Don't Know/Refused/Other 0 Missing Information 0 Total 0 Table 22 – Age Information 7. Special Populations Served—Complete for All Activities Number of Persons in Households Subpopulation Total Total Persons Served – Prevention Total Persons Served – RRH Total Persons Served in Emergency Shelters Veterans 0 0 0 0 Victims of Domestic Violence 0 0 0 0 DRAFT CAPER 44 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Subpopulation Total Total Persons Served – Prevention Total Persons Served – RRH Total Persons Served in Emergency Shelters Elderly 0 0 0 0 HIV/AIDS 0 0 0 0 Chronically Homeless 0 0 0 0 Persons with Disabilities: Severely Mentally Ill 0 0 0 0 Chronic Substance Abuse 0 0 0 0 Other Disability 0 0 0 0 Total (Unduplicated if possible) 0 0 0 0 Table 23 – Special Population Served CR-65 Narrative The tables within CR-65 are intentionally left blank as directed by HUD. The information for CR-65 is reported within the Sage system (the ESG-CAPER Annual Reporting Tool/System). Sage is the system that configures aggregate information from the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) and produces all statistical information required by HUD on program participants served in ESG-funded projects. The Sage system report for the County’s ESG program is attached as Attachment A. DRAFT CAPER 45 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CR-70 – ESG 91.520(g) - Assistance Provided and Outcomes 10. Shelter Utilization Number of New Units - Rehabbed 0 Number of New Units - Conversion 0 Total Number of bed-nights available 218,300 Total Number of bed-nights provided 195,291 Capacity Utilization 89.46% Table 24 – Shelter Capacity 11. Project Outcomes Data measured under the performance standards developed in consultation with the CoC(s) Annual Performance Measures focus on the outcomes for consumers who access the system of care. HUD pulls data each year from every CoC’s Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) Database to generate Systems Performance Measures results. These measures are used to track progress across all HUD-funded programs and to determine funding for each CoC for the following year. The Performance Measures are run for Fiscal Years, October 1 to September 30. HUD has developed the following seven system-level performance measures to help communities gauge their progress in preventing and ending homelessness: 1. Length of time persons remain homeless; 2. The extent to which persons who exit homelessness to permanent housing destinations return to homelessness; 3. Number of homeless persons; 4. Jobs and income growth for homeless persons in CoC; 5. Number of persons who become homeless for the first time; 6. Homelessness prevention and housing placement of persons defined by Category 3 of HUD’s homeless definition for CoC Program-funded projects; and, 7. Successful housing placement. Annual Performance Measures focus on the outcomes for consumers who access the system of care and are required and monitored by HUD. The high-level findings of the current Performance Measures are summarized below: The FY 20/21 performance measures revealed significant shifts in many of the performance measures which was likely a result of programmatic changes and community constraints due to COVID-19. Overall, there were fewer people served in shelters, transitional housing, and rapid rehousing. Shelters were able to serve more people at one time, but turnover was lower. This resulted in longer lengths of time experiencing homelessness. There were also “transfers” from the emergency hotel programs to Delta Landing, resulting in a decrease in the number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time and entering shelters, transitional housing, and rapid rehousing programs. This System Performance Measures data illustrates how programming during COVID-19 impacted those being served. A summary of key shifts from FY 2020 to FY 2021 is provided below: • 38% decrease in people served in shelters and transitional housing from 2,294 to1,415 • 139% increase in the average number of days homeless in emergency shelters (from 98 days to 235 days) • 57% decrease in the number of people identified for the first time from 1,428 to 621 • 10% decrease in the proportion of positive exits from outreach DRAFT CAPER 46 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) • 19% increase in the proportion of positive exits from emergency shelter, transitional housing, and rapid rehousing. DRAFT CAPER 47 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) CR-75 – Expenditures 11. Expenditures 11a. ESG Expenditures for Homelessness Prevention Dollar Amount of Expenditures in Program Year 2019 2020 2021 Expenditures for Rental Assistance 0 0 0 Expenditures for Housing Relocation and Stabilization Services - Financial Assistance 11,350 0 0 Expenditures for Housing Relocation & Stabilization Services - Services 37,147 0 10,3600 Expenditures for Homeless Prevention under Emergency Shelter Grants Program 0 0 0 Subtotal Homelessness Prevention 48,497 0 10,360 Table 25 – ESG Expenditures for Homelessness Prevention 11b. ESG Expenditures for Rapid Re-Housing Dollar Amount of Expenditures in Program Year 2019 2020 2021 Expenditures for Rental Assistance 0 0 0 Expenditures for Housing Relocation and Stabilization Services - Financial Assistance 10,971 12,404 2,125 Expenditures for Housing Relocation & Stabilization Services - Services 54,467 99,451 93,243 Expenditures for Homeless Assistance under Emergency Shelter Grants Program 0 0 0 Subtotal Rapid Re-Housing 65,438 111,855 95,368 Table 26 – ESG Expenditures for Rapid Re-Housing 11c. ESG Expenditures for Emergency Shelter Dollar Amount of Expenditures in Program Year 2019 2020 2021 Essential Services 81,000 80,000 Operations 130,000 130,000 Renovation 0 0 0 Major Rehab 0 0 0 Conversion 0 0 0 Subtotal 211,000 210,000 Table 27 – ESG Expenditures for Emergency Shelter DRAFT CAPER 48 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) 11d. Other Grant Expenditures Dollar Amount of Expenditures in Program Year 2019 2020 2021 Street Outreach 25,795 30,844 30,844 HMIS 0 0 Administration 29,490 12,092 Table 28 - Other Grant Expenditures 11e. Total ESG Grant Funds Total ESG Funds Expended 2019 2020 2021 1,105,650 380,220 364,791 342,099 Table 29 - Total ESG Funds Expended 11f. Match Source 2019 2020 2021 Other Non-ESG HUD Funds 228,942 290,479 165,073 Other Federal Funds 321,158 177,769 318,976 State Government 2,028,356 1,682,637 2,230,886 Local Government 1,757,842 651,380 799,936 Private Funds 902,850 1,236,424 1,167,200 Other 127,873 0 Fees 0 0 Program Income 0 0 Total Match Amount 5,367,021 4,038,689 4,682,071 Table 30 - Other Funds Expended on Eligible ESG Activities 11g. Total Total Amount of Funds Expended on ESG Activities 2019 2020 2021 15,050,701 5,747,241 4,403,480 5,024,170 Table 31 - Total Amount of Funds Expended on ESG Activities DRAFT CAPER 49 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Attachment A - ESG CAPER (SAGE) DRAFT CAPER 50 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 51 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 52 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 53 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 54 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 55 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 56 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 57 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 58 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 59 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 60 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 61 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Attachment B - Completed Ongoing Projects by Funding Category DRAFT CAPER 62 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 63 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 64 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 65 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 66 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 67 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 68 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 69 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 70 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 71 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 72 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 73 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 74 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 75 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 76 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Attachment C - Public Hearing Notice DRAFT CAPER 77 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) Attachment D- CDBG Financial Summary Report DRAFT CAPER 78 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 79 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 80 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 81 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 82 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT CAPER 83 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021) DRAFT RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/314, which establishes retirement plan contribution rates as approved by the Retirement Board for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: See 'Background' below. BACKGROUND: At its August 10, 2022 meeting, the Retirement Board reviewed and accepted the actuary’s valuation report for the year ending December 31, 2021 and adopted the recommended employer and employee contribution rates, which will become effective on July 1, 2023. A copy of the December 31, 2021 Actuarial Valuation can be found on Contra Costa County Employees' Retirement Association's (CCCERA) website at www.cccera.org, under the Actuarial Reports link. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Adam Nguyen, County Finance Director 655-2048 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 , County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 74 To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:RETIREMENT PLAN CONTRIBUTION RATES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023-2024 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Attached are the rates to be used effective July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024, submitted for adoption by the County Board of Supervisors by the Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association. Please note the following: The rates are effective July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. The rates are before employer subvention, if any, of the employee contribution. The rates quoted here are the employer required rates without taking into consideration any employer subvention of employee contributions. A convenient methodology for adding subvention is included on page 26 of the attached document. Note that subvention is not always permitted for PEPRA members. The rates are before any increase in employee rate to pay a portion of the employer contribution. If an employee’s rate needs to be increased to pay a portion of the employer contribution, both employee and employer rates would need to be adjusted accordingly. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Rates will not reflect those adopted by the Contra Costa County Employees Retirement Board. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2022/314 Retirement contribution rates - Exhibits MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2022/314 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 09/20/2022 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2022/314 Subject: Approving Contribution Rates to be charged by the Contra Costa County Employees' Retirement Association Pursuant to Government Code Section 31454 and on recommendation of the Board of the Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association, BE IT RESOLVED that the following contribution rates are approved to be effective for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. I. Employer Contribution Rates for Basic and Cost-of-Living Components and Non-refundability Discount Factors For General Members (Sec. 31676.11, Sec. 31676.16 and Sec. 7522.20(a)) See attached Exhibits 1 through 6A. For Safety Members (Sec. 31664, Sec. 31664.1 and Sec. 7522.25(d)) See attached Exhibits 7 through 12B. II. Employee Contribution Rates for Basic and Cost-of-Living Components See attached Exhibits A through M The Pension Obligation Bonds (POB) issued by the County in March 1994 and April 2003, affected contribution rates for certain County employers. The following non-County employers who participate in the Retirement Association are referred to as “Districts”. Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District; Byron, Brentwood Knightsen Union Cemetery District; Central Contra Costa Sanitary District; Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association; Contra Costa County Fire Protection District; Contra Costa Housing Authority; Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control District; First 5 - Children & Families Commission; In-Home Supportive Services Authority; Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO); Moraga-Orinda Fire Protection District; Rodeo-Hercules Fire Protection District; Rodeo Sanitary District; San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District All other departments/employers are referred to as “County” including the Superior Court of California, Contra Costa County. Contra Costa County Fire Protection District and Moraga-Orinda Fire Protection District issued Pension Obligation Bonds in 2005 which affected contribution rates for these two employers. Subsequently, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District made additional payments to CCCERA for its UAAL in 2006 and 2007. First 5 - Children & Families Commission made a UAAL prepayment in 2013 which affected contribution rates for that employer. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District made a UAAL prepayment in 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2021 which affected contribution rates for that employer. Local Agency Formation Commission made a UAAL prepayment in 2017, 2019, 2020 and 2021 which affected contribution rates for that employer. San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District made a UAAL prepayment in 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021 which affected contribution rates for the Safety members of that employer. Effective July 1, 2022, East Contra Costa Fire Protection District was annexed into Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. Consistent with the annexation, starting with the December 31, 2021 valuation, the prior General and Safety members from the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District have become General and Safety members of Contra Costa County Fire Protection District in Cost Group #5 and Cost Group #8, respectively. As part of the annexation, East Contra Costa Fire Protection District made a UAAL prepayment in 2022 which affected contribution rates for the General and Safety members of Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (after annexation). Contact: Adam Nguyen, County Finance Director 655-2048 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 , County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: Exhibit 1 Page 1 Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association Employer Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 for Cost Group #1 Basic COLA Non- Refundability Factor Cost Group #1 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 County General Tier 1 w/ Courts 25.60% 25.60% 5.58% 5.58% 0.9668 District General Tier 1 w/o POB 30.49% 30.49% 9.54% 9.54% 0.9668 District General Tier 1 – Moraga N/A 24.48% N/A 6.12% 0.9668 District General Tier 1 – First Five 25.89% N/A 6.03% N/A 0.9668 District General Tier 1 – LAFCO 26.49% N/A 8.11% N/A 0.9668 County General Tier 4 (3% COLA) w/ Courts 21.36% 4.99% 0.9604 District General Tier 4 (3% COLA) w/o POB 26.28% 8.94% 0.9604 District General Tier 4 (3% COLA) – Moraga 20.51% 5.58% 0.9604 District General Tier 4 (3% COLA) – First Five 21.63% 5.43% 0.9604 District General Tier 4 (3% COLA) – LAFCO 22.29% 7.51% 0.9604 County General Tier 4 (2% COLA) w/ Courts 21.06% 3.93% 0.9561 Basic rates shown include an administrative expense load of 0.65% of payroll. Employers:  County General  LAFCO  CC Mosquito & Vector Control District  Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District  First 5 - Children and Families Commission  Contra Costa County Employees' Retirement Association  Superior Court  Moraga-Orinda Fire Protection District  Rodeo-Hercules Fire Protection District  San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District 1 If employer is in Social Security, the rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. The rate should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 For legacy tier, applies to employer who is not in Social Security and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit. For PEPRA tier, applies to all employers and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the applicable annual Gov. Code 7522.10(d) compensation limit. Tiers:  Tier 1 Enhanced (2% @ 55)  Tier 4 (2.5% @ 67) Exhibit 2 Page 2 Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association Employer Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 for Cost Group #2 Basic COLA Non- Refundability Factor Cost Group #2 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 County General Tier 3 w/ Courts 24.29% N/A 5.31% N/A 0.9552 District General Tier 3 w/o POB 29.27% 29.27% 9.32% 9.32% 0.9552 County General Tier 5 (3%/4% COLA) w/ Courts 20.59% 4.69% 0.9602 District General Tier 5 (3%/4% COLA) w/o POB 25.51% 8.64% 0.9602 County General Tier 5 (2% COLA) w/ Courts 20.42% 3.75% 0.9564 District General Tier 5 (2% COLA) w/o POB 25.34% 7.70% 0.9564 Basic rates shown include an administrative expense load of 0.65% of payroll. Employers:  County General  In-Home Supportive Services Authority  CC Mosquito & Vector Control District  Superior Court 1 If employer is in Social Security, the rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. The rate should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 For legacy tier, applies to employer who is not in Social Security and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit. For PEPRA tier, applies to all employers and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the applicable annual Gov. Code 7522.10(d) compensation limit. Tiers:  Tier 3 Enhanced (2% @ 55)  Tier 5 (2.5% @ 67) Exhibit 3 Page 3 Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association Employer Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 for Cost Group #3 Basic COLA Non- Refundability Factor Cost Group #3 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District General Tier 1 N/A 13.64% N/A 3.87% 0.9614 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District General Tier 4 (3% COLA) 8.70% 2.97% 0.9669 Basic rates shown include an administrative expense load of 0.65% of payroll. Employers:  Central Contra Costa Sanitary District 1 If employer is in Social Security, the rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. The rate should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 For legacy tier, applies to employer who is not in Social Security and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit. For PEPRA tier, applies to all employers and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the applicable annual Gov. Code 7522.10(d) compensation limit. Tiers:  Tier 1 Enhanced (2% @ 55)  Tier 4 (2.5% @ 67) Exhibit 4 Page 4 Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association Employer Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 for Cost Group #4 Basic COLA Non- Refundability Factor Cost Group #4 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 Contra Costa Housing Authority General Tier 1 30.82% N/A 14.82% N/A 0.9601 Contra Costa Housing Authority General Tier 4 (3% COLA) 26.05% 13.89% 0.9626 Basic rates shown include an administrative expense load of 0.65% of payroll. Employers:  Contra Costa Housing Authority 1 If employer is in Social Security, the rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. The rate should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 For legacy tier, applies to employer who is not in Social Security and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit. For PEPRA tier, applies to all employers and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the applicable annual Gov. Code 7522.10(d) compensation limit. Tiers:  Tier 1 Enhanced (2% @ 55)  Tier 4 (2.5% @ 67) Exhibit 5 Page 5 Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association Employer Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 for Cost Group #5 Basic COLA Non- Refundability Factor Cost Group #5 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 Contra Costa County Fire Protection District General Tier 1 N/A 26.00% N/A 13.30% 0.9773 Contra Costa County Fire Protection District General Tier 4 (3% COLA) 21.87% 13.05% 0.9583 Contra Costa County Fire Protection District General Tier 4 (2% COLA) 21.21% 11.66% 0.9631 Basic rates shown include an administrative expense load of 0.65% of payroll. The above rates reflect a prepayment in the amount of $201,159 that East Contra Costa Fire Protection District made towards the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL) on June 30, 2022 as part of the annexation into Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. This prepayment has been used to reduce Contra Costa County Fire Protection District's UAAL contribution rate. Employers:  Contra Costa County Fire Protection District 1 If employer is in Social Security, the rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. The rate should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 For legacy tier, applies to employer who is not in Social Security and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit. For PEPRA tier, applies to all employers and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the applicable annual Gov. Code 7522.10(d) compensation limit. Tiers:  Tier 1 Enhanced (2% @ 55)  Tier 4 (2.5% @ 67) Exhibit 6 Page 6 Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association Employer Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 for Cost Group #6 Basic COLA Non- Refundability Factor Cost Group #6 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 Non-Enhanced District General Tier 1 13.52% N/A 4.07% N/A 0.9475 Non-Enhanced District General Tier 4 (3% COLA) 10.81% 3.56% 0.9484 Basic rates shown include an administrative expense load of 0.65% of payroll. Employers:  Rodeo Sanitary District  Byron Brentwood Cemetery District 1 If employer is in Social Security, the rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. The rate should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 For legacy tier, applies to employer who is not in Social Security and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit. For PEPRA tier, applies to all employers and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the applicable annual Gov. Code 7522.10(d) compensation limit. Tiers:  Tier 1 Non-Enhanced (1.67% @ 55)  Tier 4 (2.5% @ 67) Exhibit 7 Page 7 Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association Employer Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 for Cost Group #7 Basic COLA Non- Refundability Factor Cost Group #7 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 County Safety Tier A N/A 45.15% N/A 31.08% 0.9712 County Safety Tier D 36.37% 29.54% 0.9782 Basic rates shown include an administrative expense load of 0.65% of payroll. Employers:  County Safety 1 If employer is in Social Security, the rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. The rate should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 For legacy tier, applies to employer who is not in Social Security and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit. For PEPRA tier, applies to all employers and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the applicable annual Gov. Code 7522.10(d) compensation limit. Tiers:  Tier A Enhanced (3% @ 50)  Tier D (2.7% @ 57) Exhibit 8 Page 8 Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association Employer Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 for Cost Group #8 Basic COLA Non- Refundability Factor Cost Group #8 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Safety Tier A N/A 34.92% N/A 37.71% 0.9755 Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Safety Tier D 23.97% 35.22% 0.9800 Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Safety Tier E 24.45% 33.54% 0.9762 Basic rates shown include an administrative expense load of 0.65% of payroll. The above rates reflect a prepayment in the amount of $3,143,278 that East Contra Costa Fire Protection District made towards the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL) on June 30, 2022 as part of the annexation into Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. This prepayment has been used to reduce Contra Costa County Fire Protection District's UAAL contribution rate. Employers:  Contra Costa County Fire Protection District 1 If employer is in Social Security, the rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. The rate should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 For legacy tier, applies to employer who is not in Social Security and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit. For PEPRA tier, applies to all employers and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the applicable annual Gov. Code 7522.10(d) compensation limit. Tiers:  Tier A Enhanced (3% @ 50)  Tier D (2.7% @ 57)  Tier E (2.7% @ 57) Exhibit 9 Page 9 Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association Employer Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 for Cost Group #9 Basic COLA Non- Refundability Factor Cost Group #9 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 County Safety Tier C N/A 43.86% N/A 28.30% 0.9697 County Safety Tier E 35.55% 27.33% 0.9756 Basic rates shown include an administrative expense load of 0.65% of payroll. Employers:  County Safety (Members hired on or after January 1, 2007) 1 If employer is in Social Security, the rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. The rate should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 For legacy tier, applies to employer who is not in Social Security and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit. For PEPRA tier, applies to all employers and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the applicable annual Gov. Code 7522.10(d) compensation limit. Tiers:  Tier C Enhanced (3% @ 50)  Tier E (2.7% @ 57) Exhibit 10 Page 10 Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association Employer Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 for Cost Group #10 Basic COLA Non- Refundability Factor Cost Group #10 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 Moraga-Orinda Fire Protection District Safety Tier A N/A 36.09% N/A 44.71% 0.9730 Moraga-Orinda Fire Protection District Safety Tier D 27.02% 42.92% 0.9779 Basic rates shown include an administrative expense load of 0.65% of payroll. Employers:  Moraga-Orinda Fire Protection District 1 If employer is in Social Security, the rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. The rate should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 For legacy tier, applies to employer who is not in Social Security and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit. For PEPRA tier, applies to all employers and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the applicable annual Gov. Code 7522.10(d) compensation limit. Tiers:  Tier A Enhanced (3% @ 50)  Tier D (2.7% @ 57) Exhibit 11 Page 11 Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association Employer Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 for Cost Group #11 Basic COLA Non- Refundability Factor Cost Group #11 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District Safety Tier A N/A 55.11% N/A 33.03% 0.9770 San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District Safety Tier D 42.09% 29.48% 0.9790 Basic rates shown include an administrative expense load of 0.65% of payroll. Employers:  San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District 1 If employer is in Social Security, the rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. The rate should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 For legacy tier, applies to employer who is not in Social Security and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit. For PEPRA tier, applies to all employers and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the applicable annual Gov. Code 7522.10(d) compensation limit. Tiers:  Tier A Enhanced (3% @ 50)  Tier D (2.7% @ 57) Exhibit 12 Page 12 Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association Employer Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 for Cost Group #12 Basic COLA Non- Refundability Factor Cost Group #12 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 In Social Security1 Not In Social Security2 Rodeo-Hercules Fire Protection District Safety Tier A N/A 59.34% N/A 39.53% 0.9865 Rodeo-Hercules Fire Protection District Safety Tier D 50.70% 37.02% 0.9820 Basic rates shown include an administrative expense load of 0.65% of payroll. Employers:  Rodeo-Hercules Fire Protection District 1 If employer is in Social Security, the rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. The rate should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 For legacy tier, applies to employer who is not in Social Security and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit. For PEPRA tier, applies to all employers and the rate should be applied to all compensation up to the applicable annual Gov. Code 7522.10(d) compensation limit. Tiers:  Tier A Non-Enhanced (2% @ 50)  Tier D (2.7% @ 57) Exhibit A Page 13 General Cost Group #1 Non-PEPRA Member Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Expressed as a Percentage of Monthly Payroll1 Basic2 COLA Total Entry Age In Social Security Not In Social Security In Social Security Not In Social Security 15 5.44% 5.43% 2.77% 8.21% 8.20% 16 5.54% 5.53% 2.83% 8.37% 8.36% 17 5.64% 5.63% 2.88% 8.52% 8.51% 18 5.74% 5.73% 2.94% 8.68% 8.67% 19 5.84% 5.83% 3.00% 8.84% 8.83% 20 5.94% 5.93% 3.05% 8.99% 8.98% 21 6.05% 6.04% 3.11% 9.16% 9.15% 22 6.16% 6.15% 3.18% 9.34% 9.33% 23 6.26% 6.25% 3.23% 9.49% 9.48% 24 6.38% 6.37% 3.30% 9.68% 9.67% 25 6.49% 6.48% 3.36% 9.85% 9.84% 26 6.60% 6.59% 3.42% 10.02% 10.01% 27 6.72% 6.71% 3.49% 10.21% 10.20% 28 6.84% 6.83% 3.56% 10.40% 10.39% 29 6.96% 6.95% 3.62% 10.58% 10.57% 30 7.09% 7.08% 3.70% 10.79% 10.78% 31 7.21% 7.20% 3.77% 10.98% 10.97% 32 7.34% 7.33% 3.84% 11.18% 11.17% 33 7.47% 7.46% 3.91% 11.38% 11.37% 34 7.61% 7.60% 3.99% 11.60% 11.59% 35 7.75% 7.74% 4.07% 11.82% 11.81% 36 7.89% 7.88% 4.15% 12.04% 12.03% 37 8.03% 8.02% 4.23% 12.26% 12.25% 38 8.18% 8.17% 4.31% 12.49% 12.48% 39 8.34% 8.33% 4.40% 12.74% 12.73% 40 8.49% 8.48% 4.48% 12.97% 12.96% 41 8.64% 8.63% 4.57% 13.21% 13.20% 42 8.80% 8.79% 4.66% 13.46% 13.45% 43 8.95% 8.94% 4.74% 13.69% 13.68% 44 9.11% 9.10% 4.83% 13.94% 13.93% 45 9.27% 9.26% 4.92% 14.19% 14.18% 46 9.43% 9.42% 5.01% 14.44% 14.43% 47 9.59% 9.58% 5.10% 14.69% 14.68% 48 9.75% 9.74% 5.19% 14.94% 14.93% 49 9.89% 9.88% 5.27% 15.16% 15.15% 50 10.04% 10.03% 5.36% 15.40% 15.39% 51 10.20% 10.19% 5.45% 15.65% 15.64% 52 10.36% 10.35% 5.54% 15.90% 15.89% 53 10.52% 10.51% 5.63% 16.15% 16.14% 54 10.66% 10.65% 5.70% 16.36% 16.35% 55 10.80% 10.79% 5.78% 16.58% 16.57% 56 10.91% 10.90% 5.84% 16.75% 16.74% 57 10.90% 10.89% 5.84% 16.74% 16.73% 58 10.84% 10.83% 5.81% 16.65% 16.64% 59 10.60% 10.59% 5.67% 16.27% 16.26% 60 & Over 10.60% 10.59% 5.67% 16.27% 16.26% Administrative Expense: 0.50% of payroll added to Basic Rates COLA Loading: 56.20% applied to Basic Rates prior to adjustment for administrative expenses 1 For members in Social Security, the “In Social Security” rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. All rates should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 The Basic Rate for members in Social Security is increased by 0.01% to account for the administrative expense rate of 0.50% that is applicable to the first $116.67 of compensation. Exhibit B Page 14 General Cost Group #2 Non-PEPRA Member Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Expressed as a Percentage of Monthly Payroll1 Basic2 COLA Total Entry Age In Social Security Not In Social Security In Social Security Not In Social Security 15 5.43% 5.42% 2.41% 7.84% 7.83% 16 5.53% 5.52% 2.46% 7.99% 7.98% 17 5.63% 5.62% 2.51% 8.14% 8.13% 18 5.73% 5.72% 2.56% 8.29% 8.28% 19 5.83% 5.82% 2.61% 8.44% 8.43% 20 5.93% 5.92% 2.65% 8.58% 8.57% 21 6.04% 6.03% 2.71% 8.75% 8.74% 22 6.14% 6.13% 2.76% 8.90% 8.89% 23 6.25% 6.24% 2.81% 9.06% 9.05% 24 6.36% 6.35% 2.87% 9.23% 9.22% 25 6.47% 6.46% 2.92% 9.39% 9.38% 26 6.59% 6.58% 2.98% 9.57% 9.56% 27 6.71% 6.70% 3.04% 9.75% 9.74% 28 6.83% 6.82% 3.10% 9.93% 9.92% 29 6.95% 6.94% 3.15% 10.10% 10.09% 30 7.07% 7.06% 3.21% 10.28% 10.27% 31 7.20% 7.19% 3.28% 10.48% 10.47% 32 7.33% 7.32% 3.34% 10.67% 10.66% 33 7.46% 7.45% 3.40% 10.86% 10.85% 34 7.59% 7.58% 3.47% 11.06% 11.05% 35 7.73% 7.72% 3.54% 11.27% 11.26% 36 7.87% 7.86% 3.60% 11.47% 11.46% 37 8.02% 8.01% 3.68% 11.70% 11.69% 38 8.16% 8.15% 3.75% 11.91% 11.90% 39 8.31% 8.30% 3.82% 12.13% 12.12% 40 8.47% 8.46% 3.90% 12.37% 12.36% 41 8.62% 8.61% 3.97% 12.59% 12.58% 42 8.78% 8.77% 4.05% 12.83% 12.82% 43 8.93% 8.92% 4.12% 13.05% 13.04% 44 9.09% 9.08% 4.20% 13.29% 13.28% 45 9.25% 9.24% 4.28% 13.53% 13.52% 46 9.41% 9.40% 4.36% 13.77% 13.76% 47 9.57% 9.56% 4.44% 14.01% 14.00% 48 9.72% 9.71% 4.51% 14.23% 14.22% 49 9.88% 9.87% 4.59% 14.47% 14.46% 50 10.02% 10.01% 4.66% 14.68% 14.67% 51 10.18% 10.17% 4.74% 14.92% 14.91% 52 10.34% 10.33% 4.81% 15.15% 15.14% 53 10.49% 10.48% 4.89% 15.38% 15.37% 54 10.63% 10.62% 4.96% 15.59% 15.58% 55 10.76% 10.75% 5.02% 15.78% 15.77% 56 10.85% 10.84% 5.06% 15.91% 15.90% 57 10.90% 10.89% 5.09% 15.99% 15.98% 58 10.85% 10.84% 5.06% 15.91% 15.90% 59 10.31% 10.30% 4.80% 15.11% 15.10% 60 & Over 10.31% 10.30% 4.80% 15.11% 15.10% Administrative Expense: 0.50% of payroll added to Basic Rates COLA Loading: 48.98% applied to Basic Rates prior to adjustment for administrative expenses 1 For members in Social Security, the “In Social Security” rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. All rates should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 The Basic Rate for members in Social Security is increased by 0.01% to account for the administrative expense rate of 0.50% that is applicable to the first $116.67 of compensation. Exhibit C Page 15 General Cost Group #3 Non-PEPRA Member Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Expressed as a Percentage of Monthly Payroll1 Entry Age Basic COLA Total 15 5.64% 2.83% 8.47% 16 5.74% 2.89% 8.63% 17 5.84% 2.94% 8.78% 18 5.95% 3.01% 8.96% 19 6.05% 3.06% 9.11% 20 6.16% 3.12% 9.28% 21 6.27% 3.18% 9.45% 22 6.38% 3.24% 9.62% 23 6.49% 3.30% 9.79% 24 6.61% 3.37% 9.98% 25 6.73% 3.44% 10.17% 26 6.85% 3.50% 10.35% 27 6.97% 3.57% 10.54% 28 7.09% 3.63% 10.72% 29 7.22% 3.71% 10.93% 30 7.35% 3.78% 11.13% 31 7.48% 3.85% 11.33% 32 7.61% 3.92% 11.53% 33 7.75% 4.00% 11.75% 34 7.89% 4.07% 11.96% 35 8.03% 4.15% 12.18% 36 8.18% 4.23% 12.41% 37 8.33% 4.32% 12.65% 38 8.48% 4.40% 12.88% 39 8.64% 4.49% 13.13% 40 8.80% 4.58% 13.38% 41 8.96% 4.66% 13.62% 42 9.12% 4.75% 13.87% 43 9.28% 4.84% 14.12% 44 9.44% 4.93% 14.37% 45 9.60% 5.02% 14.62% 46 9.77% 5.11% 14.88% 47 9.93% 5.20% 15.13% 48 10.09% 5.29% 15.38% 49 10.24% 5.37% 15.61% 50 10.40% 5.46% 15.86% 51 10.55% 5.54% 16.09% 52 10.69% 5.62% 16.31% 53 10.85% 5.71% 16.56% 54 11.00% 5.79% 16.79% 55 11.16% 5.88% 17.04% 56 11.21% 5.91% 17.12% 57 11.17% 5.88% 17.05% 58 11.03% 5.81% 16.84% 59 10.48% 5.50% 15.98% 60 & Over 10.48% 5.50% 15.98% Administrative Expense: 0.50% of payroll added to Basic Rates COLA Loading: 55.14% applied to Basic Rates prior to adjustment for administrative expenses 1 All rates should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. Exhibit D Page 16 General Cost Group #4 Non-PEPRA Member Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Expressed as a Percentage of Monthly Payroll1 Basic2 COLA Total Entry Age In Social Security Not In Social Security In Social Security Not In Social Security 15 5.44% 5.43% 2.70% 8.14% 8.13% 16 5.54% 5.53% 2.76% 8.30% 8.29% 17 5.64% 5.63% 2.81% 8.45% 8.44% 18 5.74% 5.73% 2.87% 8.61% 8.60% 19 5.84% 5.83% 2.92% 8.76% 8.75% 20 5.94% 5.93% 2.98% 8.92% 8.91% 21 6.05% 6.04% 3.04% 9.09% 9.08% 22 6.16% 6.15% 3.10% 9.26% 9.25% 23 6.26% 6.25% 3.15% 9.41% 9.40% 24 6.38% 6.37% 3.22% 9.60% 9.59% 25 6.49% 6.48% 3.28% 9.77% 9.76% 26 6.60% 6.59% 3.34% 9.94% 9.93% 27 6.72% 6.71% 3.41% 10.13% 10.12% 28 6.84% 6.83% 3.47% 10.31% 10.30% 29 6.96% 6.95% 3.54% 10.50% 10.49% 30 7.09% 7.08% 3.61% 10.70% 10.69% 31 7.21% 7.20% 3.68% 10.89% 10.88% 32 7.34% 7.33% 3.75% 11.09% 11.08% 33 7.47% 7.46% 3.82% 11.29% 11.28% 34 7.61% 7.60% 3.90% 11.51% 11.50% 35 7.75% 7.74% 3.97% 11.72% 11.71% 36 7.89% 7.88% 4.05% 11.94% 11.93% 37 8.03% 8.02% 4.13% 12.16% 12.15% 38 8.18% 8.17% 4.21% 12.39% 12.38% 39 8.34% 8.33% 4.30% 12.64% 12.63% 40 8.49% 8.48% 4.38% 12.87% 12.86% 41 8.64% 8.63% 4.46% 13.10% 13.09% 42 8.80% 8.79% 4.55% 13.35% 13.34% 43 8.95% 8.94% 4.63% 13.58% 13.57% 44 9.11% 9.10% 4.72% 13.83% 13.82% 45 9.27% 9.26% 4.81% 14.08% 14.07% 46 9.43% 9.42% 4.89% 14.32% 14.31% 47 9.59% 9.58% 4.98% 14.57% 14.56% 48 9.75% 9.74% 5.07% 14.82% 14.81% 49 9.89% 9.88% 5.15% 15.04% 15.03% 50 10.04% 10.03% 5.23% 15.27% 15.26% 51 10.20% 10.19% 5.32% 15.52% 15.51% 52 10.36% 10.35% 5.40% 15.76% 15.75% 53 10.52% 10.51% 5.49% 16.01% 16.00% 54 10.66% 10.65% 5.57% 16.23% 16.22% 55 10.80% 10.79% 5.65% 16.45% 16.44% 56 10.91% 10.90% 5.71% 16.62% 16.61% 57 10.90% 10.89% 5.70% 16.60% 16.59% 58 10.84% 10.83% 5.67% 16.51% 16.50% 59 10.60% 10.59% 5.54% 16.14% 16.13% 60 & Over 10.60% 10.59% 5.54% 16.14% 16.13% Administrative Expense: 0.50% of payroll added to Basic Rates COLA Loading: 54.86% applied to Basic Rates prior to adjustment for administrative expenses 1 For members in Social Security, the “In Social Security” rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. All rates should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 The Basic Rate for members in Social Security is increased by 0.01% to account for the administrative expense rate of 0.50% that is applicable to the first $116.67 of compensation. Exhibit E Page 17 General Cost Group #5 Non-PEPRA Member Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Expressed as a Percentage of Monthly Payroll1 Entry Age Basic COLA Total 15 5.43% 2.93% 8.36% 16 5.53% 2.99% 8.52% 17 5.63% 3.05% 8.68% 18 5.73% 3.11% 8.84% 19 5.83% 3.17% 9.00% 20 5.93% 3.23% 9.16% 21 6.04% 3.29% 9.33% 22 6.15% 3.36% 9.51% 23 6.25% 3.42% 9.67% 24 6.37% 3.49% 9.86% 25 6.48% 3.55% 10.03% 26 6.59% 3.62% 10.21% 27 6.71% 3.69% 10.40% 28 6.83% 3.76% 10.59% 29 6.95% 3.83% 10.78% 30 7.08% 3.91% 10.99% 31 7.20% 3.98% 11.18% 32 7.33% 4.06% 11.39% 33 7.46% 4.13% 11.59% 34 7.60% 4.22% 11.82% 35 7.74% 4.30% 12.04% 36 7.88% 4.38% 12.26% 37 8.02% 4.47% 12.49% 38 8.17% 4.56% 12.73% 39 8.33% 4.65% 12.98% 40 8.48% 4.74% 13.22% 41 8.63% 4.83% 13.46% 42 8.79% 4.92% 13.71% 43 8.94% 5.01% 13.95% 44 9.10% 5.11% 14.21% 45 9.26% 5.20% 14.46% 46 9.42% 5.30% 14.72% 47 9.58% 5.39% 14.97% 48 9.74% 5.49% 15.23% 49 9.88% 5.57% 15.45% 50 10.03% 5.66% 15.69% 51 10.19% 5.76% 15.95% 52 10.35% 5.85% 16.20% 53 10.51% 5.95% 16.46% 54 10.65% 6.03% 16.68% 55 10.79% 6.11% 16.90% 56 10.90% 6.18% 17.08% 57 10.89% 6.17% 17.06% 58 10.83% 6.14% 16.97% 59 10.59% 5.99% 16.58% 60 & Over 10.59% 5.99% 16.58% Administrative Expense: 0.50% of payroll added to Basic Rates COLA Loading: 59.40% applied to Basic Rates prior to adjustment for administrative expenses 1 All rates should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. Exhibit F Page 18 General Cost Group #6 Non-PEPRA Member Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Expressed as a Percentage of Monthly Payroll1 Basic2 COLA Total Entry Age In Social Security Not In Social Security In Social Security Not In Social Security 15 6.19% 6.18% 2.55% 8.74% 8.73% 16 6.30% 6.29% 2.60% 8.90% 8.89% 17 6.41% 6.40% 2.65% 9.06% 9.05% 18 6.53% 6.52% 2.70% 9.23% 9.22% 19 6.64% 6.63% 2.75% 9.39% 9.38% 20 6.76% 6.75% 2.80% 9.56% 9.55% 21 6.88% 6.87% 2.86% 9.74% 9.73% 22 7.00% 6.99% 2.91% 9.91% 9.90% 23 7.13% 7.12% 2.97% 10.10% 10.09% 24 7.26% 7.25% 3.03% 10.29% 10.28% 25 7.39% 7.38% 3.09% 10.48% 10.47% 26 7.52% 7.51% 3.15% 10.67% 10.66% 27 7.65% 7.64% 3.20% 10.85% 10.84% 28 7.79% 7.78% 3.27% 11.06% 11.05% 29 7.93% 7.92% 3.33% 11.26% 11.25% 30 8.08% 8.07% 3.40% 11.48% 11.47% 31 8.23% 8.22% 3.46% 11.69% 11.68% 32 8.38% 8.37% 3.53% 11.91% 11.90% 33 8.53% 8.52% 3.60% 12.13% 12.12% 34 8.69% 8.68% 3.67% 12.36% 12.35% 35 8.85% 8.84% 3.74% 12.59% 12.58% 36 9.02% 9.01% 3.82% 12.84% 12.83% 37 9.17% 9.16% 3.89% 13.06% 13.05% 38 9.34% 9.33% 3.96% 13.30% 13.29% 39 9.50% 9.49% 4.03% 13.53% 13.52% 40 9.68% 9.67% 4.11% 13.79% 13.78% 41 9.84% 9.83% 4.19% 14.03% 14.02% 42 10.00% 9.99% 4.26% 14.26% 14.25% 43 10.18% 10.17% 4.34% 14.52% 14.51% 44 10.33% 10.32% 4.41% 14.74% 14.73% 45 10.49% 10.48% 4.48% 14.97% 14.96% 46 10.64% 10.63% 4.55% 15.19% 15.18% 47 10.82% 10.81% 4.63% 15.45% 15.44% 48 10.97% 10.96% 4.69% 15.66% 15.65% 49 11.13% 11.12% 4.77% 15.90% 15.89% 50 11.30% 11.29% 4.84% 16.14% 16.13% 51 11.38% 11.37% 4.88% 16.26% 16.25% 52 11.42% 11.41% 4.90% 16.32% 16.31% 53 11.32% 11.31% 4.85% 16.17% 16.16% 54 10.93% 10.92% 4.68% 15.61% 15.60% 55 10.93% 10.92% 4.68% 15.61% 15.60% 56 10.93% 10.92% 4.68% 15.61% 15.60% 57 10.93% 10.92% 4.68% 15.61% 15.60% 58 10.93% 10.92% 4.68% 15.61% 15.60% 59 10.93% 10.92% 4.68% 15.61% 15.60% 60 & Over 10.93% 10.92% 4.68% 15.61% 15.60% Administrative Expense: 0.50% of payroll added to Basic Rates COLA Loading: 44.87% applied to Basic Rates prior to adjustment for administrative expenses 1 For members in Social Security, the “In Social Security” rate should only be applied to monthly compensation in excess of $116.67. All rates should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. 2 The Basic Rate for members in Social Security is increased by 0.01% to account for the administrative expense rate of 0.50% that is applicable to the first $116.67 of compensation. Exhibit G Page 19 Safety Cost Group #7 Non-PEPRA Member Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Expressed as a Percentage of Monthly Payroll1 Entry Age Basic COLA Total 15 9.90% 6.63% 16.53% 16 9.90% 6.63% 16.53% 17 9.90% 6.63% 16.53% 18 9.90% 6.63% 16.53% 19 9.90% 6.63% 16.53% 20 9.90% 6.63% 16.53% 21 9.90% 6.63% 16.53% 22 10.06% 6.74% 16.80% 23 10.21% 6.85% 17.06% 24 10.37% 6.96% 17.33% 25 10.53% 7.07% 17.60% 26 10.70% 7.19% 17.89% 27 10.87% 7.31% 18.18% 28 11.05% 7.44% 18.49% 29 11.23% 7.57% 18.80% 30 11.39% 7.68% 19.07% 31 11.55% 7.79% 19.34% 32 11.71% 7.90% 19.61% 33 11.89% 8.03% 19.92% 34 12.07% 8.16% 20.23% 35 12.25% 8.28% 20.53% 36 12.44% 8.42% 20.86% 37 12.65% 8.57% 21.22% 38 12.85% 8.71% 21.56% 39 13.06% 8.86% 21.92% 40 13.29% 9.02% 22.31% 41 13.53% 9.19% 22.72% 42 13.78% 9.36% 23.14% 43 14.00% 9.52% 23.52% 44 14.17% 9.64% 23.81% 45 14.24% 9.69% 23.93% 46 14.28% 9.72% 24.00% 47 14.27% 9.71% 23.98% 48 14.09% 9.58% 23.67% 49 & Over 13.63% 9.26% 22.89% Administrative Expense: 0.50% of payroll added to Basic Rates COLA Loading: 70.51% applied to Basic Rates prior to adjustment for administrative expenses 1 All rates should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. Exhibit H Page 20 Safety Cost Group #8 Non-PEPRA Member Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Expressed as a Percentage of Monthly Payroll1 Entry Age Basic COLA Total 15 9.88% 6.66% 16.54% 16 9.88% 6.66% 16.54% 17 9.88% 6.66% 16.54% 18 9.88% 6.66% 16.54% 19 9.88% 6.66% 16.54% 20 9.88% 6.66% 16.54% 21 9.88% 6.66% 16.54% 22 10.04% 6.78% 16.82% 23 10.19% 6.88% 17.07% 24 10.35% 7.00% 17.35% 25 10.51% 7.11% 17.62% 26 10.68% 7.23% 17.91% 27 10.85% 7.35% 18.20% 28 11.02% 7.47% 18.49% 29 11.20% 7.60% 18.80% 30 11.36% 7.71% 19.07% 31 11.52% 7.83% 19.35% 32 11.69% 7.95% 19.64% 33 11.86% 8.07% 19.93% 34 12.04% 8.20% 20.24% 35 12.23% 8.33% 20.56% 36 12.42% 8.47% 20.89% 37 12.62% 8.61% 21.23% 38 12.83% 8.76% 21.59% 39 13.04% 8.91% 21.95% 40 13.26% 9.06% 22.32% 41 13.51% 9.24% 22.75% 42 13.74% 9.41% 23.15% 43 13.95% 9.55% 23.50% 44 14.14% 9.69% 23.83% 45 14.20% 9.73% 23.93% 46 14.22% 9.75% 23.97% 47 14.29% 9.80% 24.09% 48 13.95% 9.55% 23.50% 49 & Over 13.66% 9.35% 23.01% Administrative Expense: 0.50% of payroll added to Basic Rates COLA Loading: 71.04% applied to Basic Rates prior to adjustment for administrative expenses 1 All rates should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. Exhibit I Page 21 Safety Cost Group #9 Non-PEPRA Member Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Expressed as a Percentage of Monthly Payroll1 Entry Age Basic COLA Total 15 9.50% 4.17% 13.67% 16 9.50% 4.17% 13.67% 17 9.50% 4.17% 13.67% 18 9.50% 4.17% 13.67% 19 9.50% 4.17% 13.67% 20 9.50% 4.17% 13.67% 21 9.50% 4.17% 13.67% 22 9.65% 4.24% 13.89% 23 9.80% 4.31% 14.11% 24 9.95% 4.38% 14.33% 25 10.11% 4.45% 14.56% 26 10.27% 4.53% 14.80% 27 10.43% 4.60% 15.03% 28 10.59% 4.68% 15.27% 29 10.75% 4.75% 15.50% 30 10.90% 4.82% 15.72% 31 11.05% 4.89% 15.94% 32 11.21% 4.96% 16.17% 33 11.38% 5.04% 16.42% 34 11.55% 5.12% 16.67% 35 11.72% 5.20% 16.92% 36 11.90% 5.28% 17.18% 37 12.09% 5.37% 17.46% 38 12.28% 5.46% 17.74% 39 12.48% 5.55% 18.03% 40 12.68% 5.65% 18.33% 41 12.88% 5.74% 18.62% 42 13.05% 5.82% 18.87% 43 13.14% 5.86% 19.00% 44 13.21% 5.89% 19.10% 45 13.18% 5.88% 19.06% 46 13.05% 5.82% 18.87% 47 12.78% 5.69% 18.47% 48 13.19% 5.88% 19.07% 49 & Over 13.70% 6.12% 19.82% Administrative Expense: 0.50% of payroll added to Basic Rates COLA Loading: 46.35% applied to Basic Rates prior to adjustment for administrative expenses 1 All rates should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. Exhibit J Page 22 Safety Cost Group #10 Non-PEPRA Member Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Expressed as a Percentage of Monthly Payroll1 Entry Age Basic COLA Total 15 9.88% 6.69% 16.57% 16 9.88% 6.69% 16.57% 17 9.88% 6.69% 16.57% 18 9.88% 6.69% 16.57% 19 9.88% 6.69% 16.57% 20 9.88% 6.69% 16.57% 21 9.88% 6.69% 16.57% 22 10.04% 6.81% 16.85% 23 10.19% 6.92% 17.11% 24 10.35% 7.03% 17.38% 25 10.51% 7.14% 17.65% 26 10.68% 7.27% 17.95% 27 10.85% 7.39% 18.24% 28 11.02% 7.51% 18.53% 29 11.20% 7.64% 18.84% 30 11.36% 7.75% 19.11% 31 11.52% 7.86% 19.38% 32 11.69% 7.99% 19.68% 33 11.86% 8.11% 19.97% 34 12.04% 8.24% 20.28% 35 12.23% 8.37% 20.60% 36 12.42% 8.51% 20.93% 37 12.62% 8.65% 21.27% 38 12.83% 8.80% 21.63% 39 13.04% 8.95% 21.99% 40 13.26% 9.11% 22.37% 41 13.51% 9.29% 22.80% 42 13.74% 9.45% 23.19% 43 13.95% 9.60% 23.55% 44 14.14% 9.73% 23.87% 45 14.20% 9.78% 23.98% 46 14.22% 9.79% 24.01% 47 14.29% 9.84% 24.13% 48 13.95% 9.60% 23.55% 49 & Over 13.66% 9.39% 23.05% Administrative Expense: 0.50% of payroll added to Basic Rates COLA Loading: 71.37% applied to Basic Rates prior to adjustment for administrative expenses 1 All rates should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. Exhibit K Page 23 Safety Cost Group #11 Non-PEPRA Member Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Expressed as a Percentage of Monthly Payroll1 Entry Age Basic COLA Total 15 10.13% 6.89% 17.02% 16 10.13% 6.89% 17.02% 17 10.13% 6.89% 17.02% 18 10.13% 6.89% 17.02% 19 10.13% 6.89% 17.02% 20 10.13% 6.89% 17.02% 21 10.13% 6.89% 17.02% 22 10.29% 7.00% 17.29% 23 10.45% 7.12% 17.57% 24 10.61% 7.23% 17.84% 25 10.78% 7.35% 18.13% 26 10.95% 7.47% 18.42% 27 11.12% 7.60% 18.72% 28 11.30% 7.72% 19.02% 29 11.48% 7.85% 19.33% 30 11.64% 7.97% 19.61% 31 11.81% 8.09% 19.90% 32 11.98% 8.21% 20.19% 33 12.16% 8.34% 20.50% 34 12.34% 8.47% 20.81% 35 12.52% 8.60% 21.12% 36 12.72% 8.74% 21.46% 37 12.93% 8.89% 21.82% 38 13.13% 9.03% 22.16% 39 13.35% 9.19% 22.54% 40 13.57% 9.35% 22.92% 41 13.82% 9.53% 23.35% 42 14.06% 9.70% 23.76% 43 14.28% 9.86% 24.14% 44 14.45% 9.98% 24.43% 45 14.51% 10.02% 24.53% 46 14.51% 10.02% 24.53% 47 14.53% 10.03% 24.56% 48 14.23% 9.82% 24.05% 49 & Over 13.65% 9.40% 23.05% Administrative Expense: 0.50% of payroll added to Basic Rates COLA Loading: 71.52% applied to Basic Rates prior to adjustment for administrative expenses 1 All rates should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. Exhibit L Page 24 Safety Cost Group #12 Non-PEPRA Member Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Expressed as a Percentage of Monthly Payroll1 Entry Age Basic COLA Total 15 10.02% 5.32% 15.34% 16 10.02% 5.32% 15.34% 17 10.02% 5.32% 15.34% 18 10.02% 5.32% 15.34% 19 10.02% 5.32% 15.34% 20 10.02% 5.32% 15.34% 21 10.02% 5.32% 15.34% 22 10.17% 5.41% 15.58% 23 10.33% 5.50% 15.83% 24 10.49% 5.59% 16.08% 25 10.66% 5.68% 16.34% 26 10.82% 5.77% 16.59% 27 11.00% 5.87% 16.87% 28 11.17% 5.97% 17.14% 29 11.35% 6.07% 17.42% 30 11.52% 6.16% 17.68% 31 11.68% 6.25% 17.93% 32 11.85% 6.35% 18.20% 33 12.03% 6.45% 18.48% 34 12.20% 6.54% 18.74% 35 12.39% 6.65% 19.04% 36 12.59% 6.76% 19.35% 37 12.79% 6.87% 19.66% 38 12.99% 6.99% 19.98% 39 13.21% 7.11% 20.32% 40 13.43% 7.23% 20.66% 41 13.67% 7.37% 21.04% 42 13.93% 7.51% 21.44% 43 14.13% 7.62% 21.75% 44 14.29% 7.71% 22.00% 45 14.40% 7.77% 22.17% 46 14.36% 7.75% 22.11% 47 14.40% 7.77% 22.17% 48 14.16% 7.64% 21.80% 49 & Over 13.47% 7.25% 20.72% Administrative Expense: 0.50% of payroll added to Basic Rates COLA Loading: 55.93% applied to Basic Rates prior to adjustment for administrative expenses 1 All rates should be applied to compensation up to the annual IRC 401(a)(17) compensation limit, if applicable. Exhibit M Page 25 PEPRA Tier Member Contribution Rates Effective for July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Expressed as a Percentage of Monthly Payroll1 General Tiers Basic COLA Total Cost Group #1 – PEPRA Tier 4 (2% COLA) 9.04% 2.07% 11.11% Cost Group #1 – PEPRA Tier 4 (3% COLA) 9.34% 3.13% 12.47% Cost Group #2 – PEPRA Tier 5 (2% COLA) 8.40% 1.89% 10.29% Cost Group #2 – PEPRA Tier 5 (3%/4% COLA) 8.57% 2.83% 11.40% Cost Group #3 – PEPRA Tier 4 (3% COLA) 8.55% 2.97% 11.52% Cost Group #4 – PEPRA Tier 4 (3% COLA) 9.18% 3.09% 12.27% Cost Group #5 – PEPRA Tier 4 (2% COLA) 10.25% 2.35% 12.60% Cost Group #5 – PEPRA Tier 4 (3% COLA) 10.91% 3.74% 14.65% Cost Group #6 – PEPRA Tier 4 (3% COLA) 10.66% 3.56% 14.22% Safety Tiers Basic COLA Total Cost Group #7 – PEPRA Tier D 14.45% 5.98% 20.43% Cost Group #8 – PEPRA Tier D 12.62% 5.32% 17.94% Cost Group #8 – PEPRA Tier E 13.10% 3.64% 16.74% Cost Group #9 – PEPRA Tier E 13.63% 3.77% 17.40% Cost Group #10 – PEPRA Tier D 13.17% 5.55% 18.72% Cost Group #11 – PEPRA Tier D 11.67% 4.92% 16.59% Cost Group #12 – PEPRA Tier D 12.00% 5.07% 17.07% Administrative Expense: 0.50% of payroll added to Basic Rates 1 All rates should be applied to all compensation (whether or not in Social Security) up to the applicable annual Gov. Code 7522.10(d) compensation limit. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION Page 26 SUBVENTION All rates are shown as a percent of payroll. Employee contribution rates vary depending upon their tier and age at entry. To compute the exact subvention percent for each employee, do the following: Employee rate: Decrease the employee’s rate by the subvention percent (i.e. 25%, 50%, etc.). Employer rate: Increase the employer’s rate by a percent of the employee’s decrease using the applicable non-refundability factor (found on Exhibits 1 through 12). EXAMPLE FOR COST GROUP #3 LEGACY MEMBERS: If the subvention percent is 25%, and the employee’s rate is 6.00%, Employee rates should be decreased by 1.50% (25% × 6.00%) Employer rate should be increased by 1.44% (1.50% × 0.9614) Please note that for PEPRA members, subvention is generally not permitted. The standard under Gov. Code §7522.30(a) is that employees pay at least 50 percent of normal costs and that employers not pay any of the required employee contribution, but there are some exceptions. Gov. Code §7522.30(f) allows the terms (regarding the employee’s required contribution) of a contract, including a memorandum of understanding, that is in effect on January 1, 2013, to continue through the length of a contract. This means that it is possible that an employer will subvent a portion of a PEPRA member’s required contribution until the expiration date of the current contract, so long as it has been determined that the contract has been impaired. CAUTION – these rates are for employer subvention of up to one-half the member contribution under Gov. Code §31581.1, NOT employer pick-up of employee contribution rates. When an employer subvents, the contribution subvented is not placed in the member’s account and is therefore not available to the member as a refund. For this reason, the employer pays the contribution at a discount (i.e. “Non-Refundability Factor”). Employer pick-ups of employee contributions are those made under Gov. Code §31581.2 and Internal Revenue Code §414 (h)(2) for the sole purpose of deferring income tax. These contributions are added to the member’s account, are available to the member as a refund and are considered by CCCERA as part of the member’s compensation for retirement purposes. EMPLOYEE PAYMENT OF EMPLOYER COST There are several reasons why the attached contribution rates may need to be adjusted to increase the employee portion including the following: Gov. Code §31631 allows for members to pay all or part of the employer contributions. Gov. Code §31639.95 allows for Safety members to pay a portion of the employer cost for the “3% at 50” enhanced benefit. Gov. Code §7522.30(c) requires that an employee’s contribution rate be at least equal to that of similarly situated employees. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION Page 27 Gov. Code §7522.30(e) allows the employee contributions to be more than one-half of the normal cost rate if the increase has been agreed to through the collective bargaining process. If you need to increase the employee contribution rate for any reason, you will need to adjust both employee and employer rates as follows: Employee rate: Increase the employee’s rate by the desired percent of payroll. Employer rate: Decrease the employer’s rate by a percent of the cost-sharing percent of payroll using the applicable non-refundability factor. EXAMPLE FOR COST GROUP #11 LEGACY MEMBERS: If the required increase in the employee rate is 8.00%, Employee rates should be increased by 8.00%. Employer rate should be decreased by 7.82% (8.00% × 0.9770) PREPAYMENT DISCOUNT FACTOR FOR 2023-2024 Employer Contribution Prepayment Program & Discount Factor for 2023-2024 is 0.9707 If you are currently participating in the prepayment program and wish to continue, you do not need to do anything other than prepay the July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 contributions on or before July 31, 2023. If you wish to start participating, please contact the Accounting Department at CCCERA by March 31, 2023. The discount factor is calculated assuming the prepayment will be received on July 31 in accordance with Gov. Code §31582(b) in lieu of 12 equal payments due at the end of each month in accordance with Gov. Code §31582(a). The discount factor for the fiscal year July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 will be 0.9707 based on the interest assumption of 6.75% per annum. It is calculated by discounting each of the 12 equal payments back to the date that the prepayment is made and is the sum of the discount factors shown in the table below divided by 12. Each of the discount factors below is based on how many months early the payment is made. Payment Number Number of Months Payment is Made Early Discount Factor 1 0 1.0000 2 1 0.9946 3 2 0.9892 4 3 0.9838 5 4 0.9785 6 5 0.9732 7 6 0.9679 8 7 0.9626 9 8 0.9574 10 9 0.9522 11 10 0.9470 12 11 0.9419 Sum of Discount Factors Divided by 12: 0.9707 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to renew Cardroom License Number 6, known as "California Grand Casino" currently located at 5988 Pacheco Blvd., Pacheco, California, for the period of November 26, 2022 through November 25, 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to County funds. Applicant submitted $10,500 which includes $1,000 in application fees, plus $500 per table for licensing of nineteen (19) card tables. BACKGROUND: In accordance with County Ordinance No. 82-44, Chapter 52-3, Article 52-3.3, Section 52-3.321, an application has been submitted by Mr. Lamar V. Wilkinson and Ms. Elizabeth Wilkinson for the renewal of Cardroom License Number 6, known as "California Grand Casino". The Office of the Sheriff conducted a background investigation of the applicants. The investigation produced no adverse information, which would preclude approval of this application. This Cardroom License will be issued to Mr. Lamar V. Wilkinson and Ms. Elizabeth Wilkinson, owners of the cardroom establishment. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Chrystine Robbins, 925-655-0008 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 75 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Renewal of Cardroom License CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Negative action will result in Cardroom License Number 6 not being renewed and expiring on November 25, 2021. Once expired, the Cardroom will no longer be able to operated until such time that a new license has been approved. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: None. RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the 2021 Quarter 3 and Quarter 4 reports from the Council on Homelessness, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: Health, Housing and Homeless Services Division staffs the Council on Homelessness, which functions as both an advisory board to the Board of Supervisors and the governing board of the Contra Costa County Homeless Continuum of Care. In November 2014, the Board approved “Forging Ahead Towards Preventing and Ending Homelessness: An Update to Contra Costa’s 2004 Strategic Plan,” that renewed the County's 2004 plan with the latest data, best practices, and community feedback, and reaffirmed the County's commitment to the Housing First approach. As such, “Forging Ahead” establishes this guiding principle: “Homelessness is first a housing issue, and necessary supports and services are critical to help people remain housed. Our system must be nimble and flexible enough to respond through shared responsibility, accountability, and transparency of the community.” APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Jaime Jenett, (925) 464-0152 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 76 To:Board of Supervisors From:FAMILY & HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Council on Homelessness Quarter 3 and 4 Reports BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The Strategic Plan Update identifies two goals: 1) Decrease the length of time people experience homelessness by focusing on providing Permanent Housing and Services; and 2) Decrease the percentage of people who become homeless by providing Prevention activities. To achieve these goals, three strategies emerged: -Implement a coordinated entry/assessment system to streamline access to housing and services while addressing barriers, getting the right resources to the right people at the right time; and -Use best, promising, and most effective practices to give the consumer the best possible experience through the strategic use of resources; and -Develop the most effective platforms to provide access, support advocacy, and connect to the community about homelessness and available resources. The Homeless Program of the Health, Housing and Homeless Services Division partners with the Homeless Advisory Board and Continuum of Care to develop and carry out an annual action plan that identifies the objectives and benchmarks related to each of the goals and strategies of Forging Ahead. Further, the Homeless Program incorporates the strategic plan goals into its own delivery system of comprehensive services, interim housing and permanent supportive housing as well as contracting with community agencies to provide additional homeless services and housing with the goal of ending homelessness in our community. On February 28, 2022, the Family and Human Services Committee (FHS) accepted the attached 2021 Quarter 3 and 4 reports from the Council on Homelessness and directed staff to forward the report to the Board of Supervisors for its information. The delay in getting the reports to the Board of Supervisors is due to administrative staff oversight after FHS approval. Committee staff are reviewing all FHS approved items to be forwarded to the Board, and has improved its tracking tool to ensure delays do not occur in the future. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Board of Supervisors will not receive the information included in the 2021 Quarter 3 and Quarter 4 reports from the Council on Homelessness. ATTACHMENTS CoH Quarter 3 Report CoH Quarter 4 Report STAFF REPORT FROM THE CONTRA COSTA COUNCIL ON HOMELESSNESS Contra Costa County Homeless System of Care Quarterly Report for Quarter 3 of 2021 (July-September) LETTER FROM THE CHAIR Dear Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, The third quarter of 2021 saw the Continuum of Care (CoC) and Council on Homelessness (COH) prepare to respond to funding opportunities, begin work to achieve the ambitious goal committed to through the Regional Action plan of reducing homelessness by 75% by 2024 and adjust as COVID-19 impacted programs and services begin to reboot. Highlights include - Roll out of over 200 + Emergency Housing Vouchers - Responding to funding opportunities - Implementation of equity tools - Data on our system of care - Reopening of programs and facilities The Council on Homelessness is always happy to share information on the tremendous work happening to address homelessness in Contra Costa! Sincerely, Lindy Johnson, Chair of the Council on Homelessness COH QUARTERLY REPORT 2 INTRODUCTION The Contra Costa Council on Homelessness (CoH) is the governing and oversight body for the County homeless Continuum of Care (CoC) and is appointed by the Board of Supervisors. The Council provides advice and input to the Board of Supervisors on the operations of homeless services, program operations, and program development efforts in Contra Costa County. The Contra Costa Council on Homelessness is the governing body for the Contra Costa County Continuum of Care (CoC). The Contra Costa CoC is comprised of multiple partners, including service providers, members of the faith community, local business, private and public funders, community members, education system and law enforcement, and others who are working collaboratively to end homelessness. The COH and COC are supported by Contra Costa Health Services Health, Housing & Homeless Services (H3) Division. H3 functions as the CoC administrative entity and collaborative applicant, CoC Lead Agency and Homeless Management Information System (HMIS database) Lead Agency. The purpose of this report is to share information about the CoC and COH activities with the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors and to provide recommendations from the COH to the County Board of Supervisors on long range planning and policy formulation that would support the county homeless CoC. This report includes information on system data, funding and policy activities, and CoC initiatives. All information will reflect activities and data for the prior quarter. This report was produced on behalf of the CoH by H3 in collaboration with the CoH and CoC partners. SYSTEM DATA Appendix A includes a data analysis depicting the inflow and outflow of clients in the system, current utilizers of the system, and recidivism (rates of individuals returning to homelessness). The graphics and content in that analysis depict data for the third quarter of 2021 (July, August and September). SYSTEM FUNDING This quarter the CoC continued to evaluate the system of care and prepared to pursue funding opportunities to address the gaps in Contra Costa’s homeless system. Emergency Housing Vouchers (EHV)- The American Rescue Plan (ARP) of 2021 appropriated $5 billion for New Emergency Housing Vouchers (Tenant Based Rental Assistance). Contra Costa received 201 vouchers. The Council on Homelessness and providers made progress developing EHV related processes and programs needed to distribute the vouchers, including setting COH QUARTERLY REPORT 3 priorities and implementing a specific EHV Voucher Working Group of the Oversight Committee. HUD CoC NOFA- In Quarter 3 of 2021, the CoC continued preparations to compete for the CoC’s largest source of renewable (sustainable) funding from the US Department of Housing & Urban Development – the HUD CoC Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO). This competition brings in more than 80% of the CoC’s funding and is the primary source of funding for the County’s permanent supportive housing stock. This funding application was released by HUD in mid- August and the application process, including a Technical Assistance workshop for prospective applicants was completed in Q3. In early Q4, the Council on Homelessness Review and Rank Committee will review all applications and rank them in order of funding priority and the Council on Homelessness will vote on the final priority listing at the October 28, 2021 Council meeting. Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Grant (HHAP) Rounds 3&4- The state is allocating approximately $6.6M to Contra Costa through rounds 3 and 4 of the Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Grant (HHAP). The funding will require a 3-year action plan that incorporates a local landscape analysis and identification of community plans to reduce and resolve homelessness during this period of time. H3 will be working with technical assistance providers to help develop the work plan. In September, the Council voted to recommend that the community apply for HHAP Rounds 3 and 4 jointly as a CoC and County and submit intent to redirect form to the State of California. POLICY The CoC works closely with H3 and local stakeholders and system partners to track homeless and affordable housing policy that may impact the CoC, its clients, funding or current and future operations. The CoH and CoC, with support from H3, tracked the state budget and United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for upcoming funding and funding policy strategies related to homelessness. The Council tracked progress of the state budget closely and is preparing for community input opportunities to help determine local priorities for future funding. SYSTEM INITI ATIVES The CoC regularly engages in multiple activities, partnerships, evaluations, and improvement that are designed to improve services to clients and achieve various system goals. COH QUARTERLY REPORT 4 Equity - A four-part training series on Racial Equity, conducted by C4 Innovations for H3, CoC leadership, providers and partners was completed in Q3. In addition, the Council revised the supplemental application and rubric used to select new potential Council members to increase diversity and the ability of people with lived experience to be selected for the Council. Homelessness Awareness Month - The Council convened a Homelessness Awareness Month Planning Committee to develop materials and events to mark Homelessness Awareness Month in November. Regional Action Plan Progress- The Continuous Quality Improvement Committee began meeting with the goal of using Continuous Quality Improvement methods to reduce unsheltered homelessness by 75% by 2024, a goal committed to through adoption of the Regional Action Plan. System Partner Map- In this quarter, the CoC launched the Homeless Partner Map which displays homeless services and those connections to other partnering services in Contra Costa County. This tool is designed to help local agencies and partners understand how various local systems and partners are currently connected to the homeless system (Contra Costa's Homeless Continuum of Care). To see the map, go to https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/#Map. Meetings, Trainings, and Events – The CoC hosted three (3) COH meetings for Councilmembers to meet to conduct the business of the CoC Board; three (3) CoC provider meetings; five (5) trainings including the series of four (4) trainings on Racial Equity and a training on Fair Housing; and 12 other events including one (1) HUD CoC NOFO Technical Assistance Session, two (2) COH Policy Committee meetings, one (1) Oversight Committee meeting, two (2) HMIS Policy Committee meetings, two (2) Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) Committee meetings, three (3) Homelessness Awareness Month Committee meetings and one (1) Executive Director meeting. The recordings, minutes and materials for trainings and meetings can be found on the H3 website1 and on the County agenda center2, and a calendar of upcoming meetings and events can be found on the H3 website. COVID-19 UPDATE The CoC has continued to support providers, staff, and consumers during the COVID-19 pandemic providing guidance, COVID-19 testing, vaccines, and implementing a strategy to transition individuals in Project Roomkey into permanent housing. The system of care is 1 https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/partners.php#Training 2 https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/agendacenter COH QUARTERLY REPORT 5 continuing to reopen programs and sites in accordance with health orders and guidance provided by Contra Costa Health Services. Concord Shelter and Service Center- The Concord Shelter, Philip Dorn Respite Center and Concord Service Center have been remodeled and the sites reopened. The shelter now has individual sleep stations that provide privacy and allows for couples and multigenerational adult households. The Service Center provides showers, laundry, bathrooms and mail, in addition to an outdoor pocket park with kennels for pets. The Service Center will also function as a Warming Center with 6 beds for individuals who need to come indoors but cannot access a shelter. East County Interim Housing Program (ECIHP)- In quarter 3, renovations continued on the former Motel 6 in Pittsburg now operating as the East County Interim Housing Program (ECIHP), with Bay Area Community Services (BACS) contracted as the service provider. Construction began on the East County Homekey site and residents were temporarily relocated to Project Room Key sites. The Homekey site is expected to reopen in early December and once the site is repopulated, the Central county Project Room Key hotel will close. Project Room Key- In Q3, the remaining 2 Project Roomkey hotels continued operations and residents were offered housing case management focused on exit planning and housing stabilization. Housing placement continued for the one hundred participants approved for housing vouchers and Rapid Rehousing Program. TESTING AND VACCINATION In the third quarter of 2021, among people who meet the HUD definition of homelessness: • 6,026 new COVID-19 tests were administered • 327 individuals received positive tests for COVID-19 • 1,726 vaccines administered Additional data related to COVID-19 and those experiencing homelessness can be found on the data dashboard.3 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Support Policies That Further Regional Action Plan Goals 3 https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/homeless COH QUARTERLY REPORT 6 The COH is excited to support the Regional Action Plan goal to bring 75% of the unsheltered indoors by 2024 by improving existing systems & investing in the 1-2-4 system flow. In order for the CoC to reach this goal, the system will need to secure more ongoing funding for prevention and permanent housing interventions such as Permanent Supportive Housing. COH QUARTERLY REPORT 7 APPENDIX A CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HEALTH, HOUSING, AND HOMELESSNESS DATA SUMMARY Description of the data: • What: Program Utilization, Outcomes, and Consumer Demographics Summary • Who: Contra Costa Continuum of Care (CoC) consumers • When: July1, 2021 – September 30, 2021 (Quarter Three) • Why: Presentation to the Board of Supervisors This summary includes high-level analyses of CoC consumers and households during the third quarter (Q3) of 2021 (July 1, 2021 to September 30, 2021), focusing on the following four indicators, including race and ethnicity demographics for each measure: Main Findings COH QUARTERLY REPORT 8 • System Utilizers o 3,968 households (4,991 consumers) utilized the homelessness system of care during Q3 (Prevention and Diversion, Literally Homeless, and Permanent Housing programs 4). o The majority of households were White (45%), followed closely by Black/African American/African (38%); 17% were Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x). o 70% of all households accessed a Literally Homeless program. • New-to-System o 15% of all households served were new to the system (594 households). o White and Black/African American/African households each made up 38% of households that were new-to-system. 24% were Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x). o The majority of new-to-system households (83%) accessed a Literally Homeless program during Q3. • Exits from System o 15% of all households served were categorized as “outflow” or exited the system of care (599 households). o The majority of exiting households were White (44%), followed closely by Black/African American/African (36%); 21% were Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x). o 35% of households exited to a Permanent destination. o There were only four more households exiting the system of care (599 households) than newly entering the system of care (594 households) in Q3. • Returns o Small number of returning households (N=16) make the data vary widely from quarter to quarter. o White households returned to homelessness at a higher rate than any other racial group of consumers (88% of returning households). • Racial/Ethnic Comparisons o The proportion of White households new-to-system and proportion of outflow were lower than White proportion of system utilizers, suggesting that White households have less movement in and out of the system of care than other populations. o The proportion of Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) new-to-system and proportion of outflow were higher than their proportion of system utilizers, suggesting that Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) move out in and out of the system of care faster than other populations. 4 The Coordinated Entry project type is not included in this quarter’s summary. Please see the Methods section for more details. COH QUARTERLY REPORT 9 System Utilizers 3,968 households (4,991 consumers) had an active enrollment in a Continuum of Care (CoC) program during Quarter Three of 2021. This included all programs in the three intervention levels of service within Contra Costa County’s Homelessness CoC (Prevention and Diversion, Literally Homeless, and Permanent Housing programs5). The number of consumers and households accessing programs at each intervention level is presented in Table 1. Of the total 3,968 household enrollments last quarter, 2,814 households (70%) accessed Literally Homeless programs, 916 households (23%) were enrolled in Permanent Housing programs, and 238 households (7%) utilized Prevention and Diversion programs. Intervention Level Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Prevention/Diversion 337 238 6% 7% Literally Homeless 3,493 2,814 71% 70% Permanent Housing 1,162 916 23% 23% Total Deduplicated 4,991 3.968 100% 100% Table 1. Household System Utilization by Intervention Level White households were the largest racial group accessing the system of care (making up 45% of households in the CoC); followed by Black/African American (38%). All other racial groups made up 7% or less of the CoC (Table 2). Race of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households White 2,149 1,794 43% 45% Black, African American, or African 1,906 1,490 38% 38% American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 376 284 8% 7% Multi-Racial 282 176 6% 4% Asian or Asian American 101 75 2% 2% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 77 55 2% 1% Missing 98 84 2% 2% Total Deduplicated 4,991 3,968 100% 100% 5 A detailed description of each program type category is provided in the Methods section of this summary. COH QUARTERLY REPORT 10 Table 2. Race Breakdown by Unique Consumers and Households Non-Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) made up 81% of the CoC; 17% were Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x), (Table 3). Ethnicity of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Non-Hispanic/Non-Latin(a)(o)(x) 3,929 3,215 79% 81% Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) 967 668 19% 17% Missing 395 85 2% 2% Total Deduplicated 4,991 3,968 100% 100% Table 3. Ethnicity Breakdown by Unique Consumers and Households New-to-System 594 households (with 813 unique consumers), or 15% of all households served during Q3, enrolled into the system of care for the first time ever during the report period. This includes new enrollments into a program within the Prevention and Diversion, Literally Homeless, or Permanent Housing intervention levels. The breakdown of program utilization by intervention level is shown in Table 4. Of the 594 new households entering the system in Q3, 97 (16%) entered Prevention and Diversion programs, 493 (83%) entered Literally Homeless programs, and 4 households (1%) entered Permanent Housing programs. Intervention Level Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Prevention and Diversion 144 97 18% 16% Literally Homeless 664 493 82% 83% Permanent Housing 5 4 1% 1% Total (unduplicated) 813 594 100% 100% Table 4: Household Inflow by Program Type Both White and Black/African American households made up 38% of the households that were new-to-system followed by American Indian/Alaska Native/Indigenous (11%, Table 5). COH QUARTERLY REPORT 11 Race of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households White 292 226 36% 38% Black, African American, or African 323 227 40% 38% American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 89 65 11% 11% Multi-Racial 36 24 4% 4% Asian or Asian American 20 9 2% 1% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 10 8 1% 1% Missing 43 35 5% 6% Total Deduplicated 815 601 100% 100% Table 5: Race Breakdown of Consumers New to System of Care Non-Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) made up 72% of the CoC; 24% were Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x), (Table 3). The proportion of Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) that made up new-to-system (24%) was higher than the proportion of Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) of system utilizers (17%). Ethnicity of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Non-Hispanic/Non-Latin(a)(o)(x) 585 428 72% 72% Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) 200 141 25% 24% Missing 28 25 3% 4% Total Deduplicated 813 594 100% 100% Table 6: Ethnicity Breakdown of Consumers New to System of Care System Outflow 599 households (819 consumers), or 15% of active consumers during Q3, exited the system of care and did not reenroll into another program by the end of the reporting period. The exit destinations of consumers leaving the system of care, according to their final exit, are shown in Table 7. Exit destination categories include Temporary settings (emergency shelters not in the HMIS, hospital, jail, staying with friends or family temporarily), Permanent settings (subsidized housing with a move-in date, moving into own unit/house, staying with friends or family permanently, nursing home), Unsheltered Destination (last destination recorded was a place not meant for habitation), and Other (consumer deceased or destination unknown). COH QUARTERLY REPORT 12 209 households (365 consumers), or 35% of all household system leavers, exited to a Permanent exit destination in Quarter Three. Another 48% of households exited to an Other/Unknown destination, 12% to a Temporary destination, and 5% to an Unsheltered exit destination. Exit Destination Category Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Temporary 102 73 12% 12% Permanent 365 209 45% 35% Unsheltered 37 32 5% 5% Other/Unknown 315 285 38% 48% Total Deduplicated 819 599 100% 100% Table 7: Exit Destinations of Consumers Leaving the System of Care White households were the largest racial group making up system outflow (44% of households exiting the system of care); followed by Black/African American (36%). All other racial groups made up 7% or less of system outflow (Table 8). Race of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households White 329 265 40% 44% Black, African American, or African 320 213 39% 36% American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 58 44 7% 7% Multi-Racial 49 31 6% 5% Asian or Asian American 30 20 4% 3% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 8 5 1% 1% Missing 25 19 3% 3% Total Deduplicated 819 599 100% 100% Table 8: Race Breakdown of Consumers Exiting the System of Care Non-Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) made up 76% of the system outflow (76% of exiting households); 21% were Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x), (Table 9). Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) made up a greater proportion of exits from the CoC (21%) than system utilizers (17%). COH QUARTERLY REPORT 13 Ethnicity of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Non-Hispanic/Non-Latin(a)(o)(x) 611 457 75% 76% Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) 186 124 23% 21% Missing 22 18 3% 3% Total Deduplicated 819 599 100% 100% Table 9: Ethnicity Breakdown of Consumers Exiting the System of Care Recidivism 16 households (21 consumers) returned as literally homeless to the CoC in Q3 of 2021. A return as literally homeless included anyone who enrolled in a Literally Homeless program within two years from their last exit to a Permanent destination. Because the number of people/households returning each quarter is small, proportions of returns by race and ethnicity will be more pronounced and will fluctuate significantly each quarter. Please keep this in mind as conclusions are drawn potentially indicating disparities. Annual data will be analyzed at the final quarter to check on the stability of any disparities identified across quarters. White households made up a greater proportion of people returning to the system (88%) and Asian/Asian Americans made up 12%. No other racial groups returned to the crisis response from a previous permanent housing exit (Table 10). Again, these numbers are too low to draw comparisons to other data in this report. Race of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households White 18 14 82% 88% Black, African American, or African 0 0 0% 0% American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 0 0 0% 0% Multi-Racial 0 0 0% 0% Asian or Asian American 2 2 10% 12% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 1 0* 4% 0% Missing 1 0* 4% 0% Total Deduplicated 21 16 100% 100% *Household data is based on the HoH. Asian or Asian American and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander each had one consumer who returned, but not reflected as a household. Those consumers were dependents and not counted as a household. Table 10: Race Breakdown of Consumers Returning to System of Care COH QUARTERLY REPORT 14 Non-Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) made up 81% of the system returners (13 households); 19% were Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x), (Table 11). Ethnicity of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Non-Hispanic/Non-Latin(a)(o)(x) 17 13 81% 81% Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) 4 3 19% 19% Missing 0 0 0% 0% Total Deduplicated 21 16 100% 100% Table 11: Ethnicity Breakdown of Consumers Returning to System of Care New-to-System and Outflow by Race/Ethnicity Summarizing the Quarter Three findings presented above, the system of care was comprised of 3,968 households: 594 households (813 consumers) were new to the system, 599 households (819 consumers) left the system, and 16 households (21 consumers) returned within two years from an exit to a stably housed destination (Figure 1). Figure 1: Overview of System Utilization Unique Households) 16 599 594 3,968 Returns Outflow New-to-System Total System Utilizers Overview of System Utilization (Households) COH QUARTERLY REPORT 15 There are differences by race and ethnicity for system utilizers, new-to-system, outflow, and returns to the homelessness system of care (Figure 2): • White households made up 45% of system utilizers, 38% of new-to-system, 44% of outflow, and 88% of returns. This percent of new-to-system than system utilizers and exits/outflow suggests that White households had more people who remain in the system for longer periods of time than other racial/ethnic groups. The very few number of households that return to the system within the reporting preriod make inferences about the data inconclusive. • Black/African American households made up 38% of system utuilzers, 38% of new-to- system, 36% of outflow, and 0% of returns. There were no differences across the system categories. • American Indian/Alaska Native/Indigenous made up 7% of system utilizers, 11% of new-to- system, 7% of outflow, and 0% of returns. They had higher rates of new-to-system than system utilization. • People with Multiple Races made up 4% of system utilizers, 4% of new-to-system, 5% of outflow, and 0% of returns. There were no differences across the system categories. • Asian/Asian American households made up 2% of system utilizers, 1% of new-to-system, 3% of outflow, and 12% of returns. The low number of households that return to the system make inferences about the data inconclusive. • Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander households made up 1% of system utilzers, 1% of new-to- system, 1% of outflow, and 0% of returns. There were no differences across the system categories. • Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) households made up 17% of system utilizers, 24% of new-to-system, 21% of outflow, and 19% of returns. The higher proportion of new-to-system and outflow than system utilizers suggest that this population moves in and out of the system faster than other racial/ethnic groups. COH QUARTERLY REPORT 16 Figure 2: System Utilization by Race & Ethnicity 45%38% 7%4%2%1% 17% 38%38% 11%4%1%1% 24% 44%36% 7%5%3%1% 21% 88% 0%0%0% 13% 0% 20% Race and Ethnicity Across User Types (Households) System Utilizers New-to-System Outflow Returns COH QUARTERLY REPORT 17 Methods & Definitions Data Quality & Analysis • As the methodology to pull and analyze the BOS quarterly data continues to be refined and improved, we recommend not drawing conclusions based on previous BOS quarter data. We will provide an annual report summarizing all quarters in early 2022 that will provide insight on these four primary indicators over an annual basis. Further, the HMIS is a live and shared database; numbers are potentially subject to minor fluctuations at any given time, should the report be rerun for the same time period. This could be due to retroactive data entry or data clean-up work. Head of Household (HoH) • The Head of Household (HoH) is one member of a household to whom all other household members can be associated. A household can be a single individual or a group of persons who apply together to a continuum project for assistance and who live together in one dwelling unit, or, for persons who are not housed, who would live together in one dwelling unit if they were housed. For the purpose of this report, the demographic data of the HoH represents the entire household. • Sometimes consumers enroll in a program with a household and enroll in another program as a single adult. They are reflected in both the household count and the consumer count. • Household data is determined by the HoH, including demographics such as race and ethnicity. Race Definitions (as defined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development) • American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous: A person having origins to any of the indigenous peoples of North and South America, including Central America. • Asian or Asian American: A person having origins of Asian descent, including but not limited to Chinese, Indian, Japanese, Korean, Pakistani, Vietnamese, or another representative nation/region. • Black, African American, or African: A person having origins to any of the Black racial groups of Africa, including Afro-Caribbean. • Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: A person having origins in any of the indigenous peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or another Pacific Island. • Multi-Racial: A person who identifies as more than one race. • White: A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. COH QUARTERLY REPORT 18 Ethnicity • Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x): A person of Central American, Latin American, or South American origin, separate from race. Deduplication Strategies—intervention levels, outflow, new-to-system, returners • Consumers and households may enter multiple programs within the same intervention level, or even across intervention levels, resulting in multiple enrollments over the course of a report period. This requires manually removing duplicate enrollments. When removing duplicate enrollments across intervention levels, we chose enrollments in Literally Homeless over Prevention and Diversion or Permanent Supportive Housing. For the outflow, new-to-system, and return analyses, the order of deduplication did not impact the results as we simply needed to know the number of consumers/households. Intervention Levels • Intervention Levels included in this report are 1) Prevention and Diversion, 2) Literally Homeless, and 3) Permanent Housing. Coordinated Entry has been excluded from this analysis due to pending system wide decisions around inclusion/exclusion criteria, as well as data completion concerns. The system utilization numbers in this report will be noticeably lower compared to Quarter 1, which did include Coordinated Entry program data. o Prevention and Diversion:  An enrollment into a Homeless Prevention or Diversion program o Literally Homeless:  An enrollment in Emergency Shelter, Transitional Housing, or Street Outreach  An enrollment in a Services Only project with no move-in date recorded, and with a housing status not equal to “stably housed”  Rapid Rehousing or Permanent Supportive Housing if the household does not have a move-in date o Permanent Housing:  An enrollment in Rapid Rehousing or Permanent Supportive Housing with a move-in date  An enrollment in Street Outreach or Services Only project while stably housed, according to the housing status question Exit Destination Categories • The specific exit destinations that fall under each category are listed below: o Temporary: COH QUARTERLY REPORT 19  Emergency shelter not in HMIS, including hotel or motel paid for with emergency shelter voucher, or RHY-funded Host Home shelter, Hospital or other residential non-psychiatric medical facility, Host Home (non-crisis), Hotel or motel paid for without emergency shelter voucher, Moved from one HOPWA funded project to HOPWA TH, Jail, prison or juvenile detention facility, Psychiatric hospital or other psychiatric facility, Staying or living with family, temporary tenure (e.g. room, apartment or house), Staying or living with friends, temporary tenure (e.g. room, apartment or house), Transitional housing for homeless persons (including homeless youth) not in HMIS, Safe Haven, Residential project or halfway house with no homeless criteria, Substance abuse treatment facility or detox center. o Permanent:  Long-term care facility or nursing home, Rental by client in a public housing unit, Rental by client, no ongoing housing subsidy, Rental by client, with GPD TIP housing subsidy, Owned by client, no ongoing housing subsidy, Owned by client, with ongoing housing subsidy, Moved from one HOPWA funded project to HOPWA PH, Rental by client, with HCV voucher (tenant or project based), Rental by client, with other ongoing housing subsidy, Rental by client, with RRH or equivalent subsidy, Rental by client, with VASH housing subsidy, Permanent housing (other than RRH) for formerly homeless persons, Staying or living with friends, permanent tenure, Foster care home or foster care group home, Staying or living with family, permanent tenure. All of these exits must have a move-in date. o Unsheltered:  Place not meant for habitation (e.g., a vehicle, an abandoned building, bus/train/subway station/airport or anywhere outside). o Other/Unknown:  Client doesn't know, Client refused, Data not collected, Deceased, Other, or No exit interview completed. COH QUARTERLY REPORT 20 APPENDIX B Commonly Used Acronyms and Terms Acronym Definition APR Annual Performance Report (for HUD homeless programs) BOS Board of Supervisors (Contra Costa County) BCSH California Business Consumer, Services and Housing Agency CARE Coordinated Assessment and Resource CCACS/CCYCS Contra Costa Adult Continuum of Service/ Contra Costa Youth Continuum of Services (H3 programs) CDBG, CDBG-CV Community Development Block Grant (federal and state programs) and the federal Community Development Block Grant CARES Act coronavirus allocation. CESH California Emergency Solutions and Housing program (state funding) COH Council on Homelessness Continuum of Care (CoC) Continuum of Care approach to assistance to the homeless. Federal grant program promoting and funding permanent solutions to homelessness. Con Plan Consolidated Plan, a locally developed plan for housing assistance and urban development under CDBG. CES/CE Coordinated Entry CNWS Concord Naval Weapons Station CORE Coordinated Outreach Referral, Engagement program COVID-19 Coronavirus DCD Contra Costa Department of Conservation and Development DOC Department Operations Center CDSS California Department of Social Services EHSD (Contra Costa County) Employment and Human Services Division EOC Emergency Operations Center ESG and ESG- CV Emergency Solutions Grant (federal and state program) and the federal Emergency Solutions Grant CARES Act coronavirus allocation. FMR Fair Market Rent (maximum rent for Section 8 rental assistance/CoC grants) HCD Housing and Community Development (State office) HCFC Housing Coordinating and Financing Council (state governing board under BCSH) HEAP Homeless Emergency Aid Program (state funding) HEARTH Homeless Emergency and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act of 2009 HHAP Homeless Housing and Assistance Program (state funding); HMIS Homeless Management Information System HOME Home Investment Partnerships (CPD program) COH QUARTERLY REPORT 21 Homekey California funding to support development of interim and permanent housing HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (federal) MHSA Mental Health Services Act NOFA Notice of Funding Availability PHA Public Housing Authority Project Roomkey COVID-related State funding program to support decongregating homeless shelters using hotels/motels. PSH Permanent Supportive Housing PUI Persons Under Investigation RFP/RFQ/LOI Request for Proposal/Request for Qualifications/Letter of Intent related to funding opportunities RRH Rapid Rehousing SAMHSA Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration SRO Single-Room Occupancy housing units SSDI Social Security Disability Income SSI Supplemental Security Income TA Technical Assistance TAY Transition Age Youth (usually ages 16-24) VA Veterans Affairs (U.S. Department of) VASH Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing VI-SPDAT Vulnerability Index – Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool Contra Costa County COVID-19 Resources: Please see below for additional resources on COVID-19. Health Services COVID Data Dashboard- https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/dashboard Health Services Homeless Specific Data Dashboard- https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/homeless-dashboar Health Services COVID Updates- https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/health-services-updates Health Services Homeless-Specific COVID Resources -https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/for-the-homeless STAFF REPORT FROM THE CONTRA COSTA COUNCIL ON HOMELESSNESS Contra Costa County Homeless System of Care Quarterly Report for Quarter 4 of 2021 (October - December) LETTER FROM THE CHAIR Dear Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, The fourth quarter of 2021 saw the Continuum of Care (CoC) and Council on Homelessness (COH) responding to our system’s largest funding opportunity (Housing and Urban Development CoC Notice of Funding Opportunity), implement equity principles in new Council member selection process, with great results and reopen more County shelter facilities as we responded to the Omicron COVID-19 variant. Highlights include - Continued distribution of Emergency Housing Vouchers - Application process for HUD CoC NOFO - Selected new Council Members that better reflect the diversity of the community served - Data on our system of care - Reopening of County shelter - Responding to Omicron variant I have decided to step down from my seat as the Community Member representative to make space for more diversity on the Council but intend to stay involved and engaged in addressing homelessness in our community. It’s been a pleasure working with H3 staff and the entire Council on Homelessness. I am constantly inspired by their commitment to service and improving the quality of life for all members of our community! Sincerely, Lindy Johnson, Outgoing Chair of the Council on Homelessness COH QUARTERLY REPORT 2 INTRODUCTION The Contra Costa Council on Homelessness (CoH) is the governing and oversight body for the County homeless Continuum of Care (CoC) and is appointed by the Board of Supervisors. The Council provides advice and input to the Board of Supervisors on the operations of homeless services, program operations, and program development efforts in Contra Costa County. The Contra Costa Council on Homelessness is the governing body for the Contra Costa County Continuum of Care (CoC). The Contra Costa CoC is comprised of multiple partners, including service providers, members of the faith community, local business, private and public funders, community members, education system and law enforcement, and others who are working collaboratively to end homelessness. The COH and COC are supported by Contra Costa Health Services Health, Housing & Homeless Services (H3) Division. H3 functions as the CoC administrative entity and collaborative applicant, CoC Lead Agency and Homeless Management Information System (HMIS database) Lead Agency. The purpose of this report is to share information about the CoC and COH activities with the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors and to provide recommendations from the COH to the County Board of Supervisors on long range planning and policy formulation that would support the county homeless CoC. This report includes information on system data, funding and policy activities, and CoC initiatives. All information will reflect activities and data for the prior quarter. This report was produced on behalf of the CoH by H3 in collaboration with the CoH and CoC partners. SYSTEM DATA Appendix A includes a data analysis depicting the inflow and outflow of clients in the system, current utilizers of the system, and recidivism (rates of individuals returning to homelessness). The graphics and content in that analysis depict data for the fourth quarter of 2021 (October, November and December). SYSTEM FUNDING This quarter the CoC continued to evaluate the system of care and pursued funding opportunities to address the gaps in Contra Costa’s homeless system, including our largest source of funding, the HUD CoC NOFO HUD CoC NOFO- In Quarter 4 of 2021, the CoC completed its Housing and Urban Development Continuum of Care Notice of Funding Opportunity (HUD CoC NOFO) application process. This work including having a sub-committee of the Council on Homelessness review and rank all COH QUARTERLY REPORT 3 submitted applications from providers seeking HUD CoC funds and having the Council on Homelessness vote on the final ranking of projects to be submitted to HUD. The full application was submitted to HUD 11/15/21. Emergency Housing Vouchers (EHV)- The American Rescue Plan (ARP) of 2021 appropriated $5 billion for New Emergency Housing Vouchers (Tenant Based Rental Assistance). Contra Costa received 201 vouchers. Fifty seven (57) long term shelter stayers were approved through Contra Costa's Coordinated Entry System (CES) and referred to the Housing Authority of Contra Costa County (HACCC) for processing and approval. Contra Costa CES, along with HomeBase, conducted multiple trainings on aftercare and individualized service plans with providers making referrals for EHV and client facing materials were developed and translated into Spanish. POLICY The CoC works closely with H3 and local stakeholders and system partners to track homeless and affordable housing policy that may impact the CoC, its clients, funding or current and future operations. The CoH and CoC, with support from H3, tracked the state budget and United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for upcoming funding and funding policy strategies related to homelessness. The Council tracked progress of the state budget closely and is preparing for community input opportunities to help determine local priorities for future funding. SYSTEM INITI ATIVES The CoC regularly engages in multiple activities, partnerships, evaluations, and improvement that are designed to improve services to clients and achieve various system goals. Equity - C4 Innovations, a technical assistance provider, conducted Listening Sessions with clients and staff as part of an equity assessment that will be presented in Q1 2022. Using revised the supplemental application and rubric, the Council selected new Council members that increased the racial and ethnic diversity and number of people with lived experience to serve on the Council. Homelessness Awareness Month – To mark Homelessness Awareness Month (November), the CoC developed a 100+ page toolkit (https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/Homeless-Awarenes- Toolkit.pdf) , a 5-minute video amplifying the voices of people with lived experience of homelessness (https://spark.adobe.com/video/g8uFATP1cNCaI), recognized over 50 outstanding individuals and agencies impacting homelessness (https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/awards.php), presented to the Board of Supervisors on 11/9 and COH QUARTERLY REPORT 4 hosted a the CoC Learning Hub: "Hearing Other People's Experiences (H.O.P.E.) Beyond Homelessness”, a panel discussion featuring people with lived experience in our community. A recording of the Learning Hub can be viewed here: https://youtu.be/1-V9Su8fnUc and recommendations from the attendees of that panel discussion can be found in the “Recommendations” section below. Regional Action Plan Progress- The Council on Homelessness Continuous Quality Improvement Committee was renamed the “Plan for Accelerating Transformative Housing (PATH) Innovations Committee”. This committee of diverse stakeholders is looking at the Regional Action Plan 1:2:4 cost/gaps analysis model and will utilize improvement science techniques to test the effectiveness of selected interventions. Meetings, Trainings, and Events – The CoC hosted three (3) COH meetings for Councilmembers to meet to conduct the business of the CoC Board; multiple Committee and Work Group meetings including three (3) HUD CoC NOFO Review and Rank Sessions, one (1) Oversight Committee meeting with three (3) EHV Work Group meetings and one (1) public EHV Feedback session to support the work of that committee, one (1) HMIS Policy Committee meeting, one (1) Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) Committee meeting, one (1) Homelessness Awareness Month (HAM) Committee meeting and two (2) video Work Group meetings to support the work of that committee, three (3) Nominating Committee meetings, one (1) Point in Time Count Committee meeting; and additional CoC meetings including: one (1) Executive Director meeting; three (3) CoC provider meetings; two (2) trainings including “Workforce Development” and “Working with Clients with Criminal Histories”, a CoC Learning Hub :”Hearing Other People's Experiences (H.O.P.E.) Beyond Homelessness” and the launch of the Homeless-Workforce Integration Network (H-WIN) meetings (a partnership between Workforce Development and Homeless Services). The recordings, minutes and materials for trainings and meetings can be found on the H3 website 1 and on the County agenda center 2, and a calendar of upcoming meetings and events can be found on the H3 website. COVID-19 UPDATE The CoC has continued to support providers, staff, and consumers during the COVID-19 pandemic providing guidance, COVID-19 testing, vaccines, and implementing a strategy to transition individuals in Project Roomkey into permanent housing. The system of care is 1 https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/partners.php#Training 2 https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/agendacenter COH QUARTERLY REPORT 5 continuing to reopen programs and sites in accordance with health orders and guidance provided by Contra Costa Health Services. Brookside Shelter – The County’s Brookside Shelter in Richmond reopened on December 1st, 2022 with capacity for 34 individuals and 2 couples. Delta Landing- In Q4, the project formerly known as the East County Interim Housing Project (ECHIP) was renamed to Delta Landing. H3 hosted a Grand Opening on December 6th that included attendance by a representative from Governor Newsome’s office as well representatives from other as local, state and federal elected officials. Construction is expected to finish in early 2022, and when reopened, the facility will have 172 resident rooms. Project Room Key- In Q4, operations at the Marriott, SureStay, and Premier Inn continued, pending the reopening of Delta Landing. The SureStay in Richmond was host to 32 PUI rooms, but because of the recent surge across the county, an additional 20 rooms were brought online for PUI placements. H3 and Public Health continue closely monitoring occupancy at the site. TESTING AND VACCINATION In the fourth quarter of 2021, among people who meet the HUD definition of homelessness: • # of COVID-19 tests: 5,128 • # of individuals with positive test for COVID-19: 95 • # of vaccines administered: 1,738 Additional data related to COVID-19 and those experiencing homelessness can be found on the data dashboard.3 RECOMMENDATIONS Participants of the 11/8/21 CoC Learning Hub: "Hearing Other People's Experiences (H.O.P.E.) Beyond Homelessness” were asked to provide their recommendations to decision makers about how to best respond to homelessness. Three key themes emerged from their responses: 1. Invest more in direct services 2. Invest in amplifying the voice of people with lived experience 3. Invest in housing 3 https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/homeless COH QUARTERLY REPORT 6 APPENDIX A Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary Q4, 2022 Page - 1 - of 15 Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary Description of the data: • What: Program Utilization, Outcomes, and Consumer Demographics Summary • Who: Contra Costa Continuum of Care (CoC) consumers • When: October 1, 2021 – December 31, 2021 (Quarter Four) • Why: Presentation to the Board of Supervisors This summary includes high-level analyses of CoC consumers and households during the fourth quarter (Q4) of 2021 (October 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021), focusing on the following four indicators, including race and ethnicity demographics for each measure: Page - 2 - of 15 Main Findings • System Utilizers o 4,061 households (5,163 consumers) utilized the homelessness system of care during Q4 (Prevention and Diversion, Literally Homeless, and Permanent Housing programs 1). o The majority of households were White (45%), followed closely by Black/African American/African (38%); 17% were Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x). o 73% of all households accessed a Literally Homeless program. • New-to-System o 15% of all households served were new to the system (629 households). o Black/African American/African households made up 42% of households that were new-to-system; White households made up 35%. 22% were Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x). o The majority of new-to-system households (90%) accessed a Literally Homeless program during Q4. • System Outflow o 19% of all households served were categorized as “outflow” or exited the system of care (776 households). o The majority of exiting households were White (44%), followed closely by Black/African American/African (35%); 22% were Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x). o 20% of households exited to a Permanent destination. o There were 147 more households exiting the system of care (776 households) than newly entering the system of care (629 households) in Q4. • Returns o Small number of returning households (N=24) make the data vary widely from quarter to quarter. o White households made up 71% of returning households and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders made up 25%. • Racial/Ethnic Comparisons o The proportion of White households new-to-system and proportion of outflow were lower than White proportion of system utilizers, suggesting that White households have less movement in and out of the system of care than other populations. o The proportion of Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) new-to-system and proportion of outflow were higher than their proportion of system utilizers, suggesting that Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) move out in and out of the system of care faster than other populations. 1 The Coordinated Entry project type is not included in this quarter’s summary. Please see the Methods section for more details. Page - 3 - of 15 System Utilizers 4,061 households (5,163 consumers) had an active enrollment in a Continuum of Care (CoC) program during Quarter Four of 2021. This included all programs in the three intervention levels of service within Contra Costa County’s Homelessness CoC (Prevention and Diversion, Literally Homeless, and Permanent Housing programs2). The number of consumers and households accessing programs at each intervention level is presented in Table 1. Of the total 4,061 household enrollments last quarter, 2,981 households (73%) accessed Literally Homeless programs, 896 households (22%) were enrolled in Permanent Housing programs, and 183 households (5%) utilized Prevention and Diversion programs. Intervention Level Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Prevention/Diversion 284 183 5% 5% Literally Homeless 3,755 2,981 72% 73% Permanent Housing 1,185 896 23% 22% Total Deduplicated 5,163 4,061 100% 100% Table 1. Household System Utilization by Intervention Level White households were the largest racial group accessing the system of care (making up 45% of households in the CoC); followed by Black/African American/African (38%). All other racial groups made up 8% or less of the CoC (Table 2). Race of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households White 2,154 1,791 42% 45% Black, African American, or African 2,008 1,524 39% 38% American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 363 288 7% 7% Multi-Racial 295 179 6% 4% Asian or Asian American 98 65 2% 2% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 88 76 2% 2% Missing 157 138 2% 2% Total Deduplicated 5,163 4,061 100% 100% Table 2. Race Breakdown by Unique Consumers and Households 2 A detailed description of each program type category is provided in the Methods section of this summary. Page - 4 - of 15 Non-Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) made up 81% of the CoC; 17% were Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x), (Table 3). Ethnicity of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Non-Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) 4,049 3,252 78% 81% Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) 995 698 19% 17% Missing 119 111 2% 2% Total Deduplicated 5,163 4,061 100% 100% Table 3. Ethnicity Breakdown by Unique Consumers and Households New-to-System 629 households (with 905 unique consumers), or 15% of all households served during Q4, enrolled into the system of care for the first time ever during the report period. This includes new enrollments into a program within the Prevention and Diversion, Literally Homeless, or Permanent Housing intervention levels. The breakdown of program utilization by intervention level is shown in Table 4. Of the 629 new households entering the system in Q4, 64 (10%) entered Prevention and Diversion programs, 563 (90%) entered Literally Homeless programs, and 2 households (less than1%) entered Permanent Housing programs. Intervention Level Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Prevention and Diversion 111 64 12% 10% Literally Homeless 792 563 88% 90% Permanent Housing 2 2 <1% <1% Total (unduplicated) 905 629 100% 100% Table 4: Household Inflow by Program Type Black/African American/African households made up 42% of the households that were new-to- system followed by White households (35%) and American Indian/Alaska Native/Indigenous (10%, Table 5). Page - 5 - of 15 Race of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households White 289 222 32% 35% Black, African American, or African 394 251 44% 42% American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 90 66 10% 10% Multi-Racial 39 21 4% 3% Asian or Asian American 11 13 2% 2% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 23 14 3% 2% Missing 47 36 5% 6% Total Deduplicated 905 629 100% 100% Table 5: Race Breakdown of Consumers New to System of Care Non-Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) made up 74% of the CoC; 22% were Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x), (Table 3). The proportion of Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) that made up new-to-system (22%) was higher than the proportion of Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) of system utilizers (17%). Ethnicity of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Non-Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) 668 463 74% 74% Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) 202 137 22% 22% Missing 30 24 4% 4% Total Deduplicated 905 629 100% 100% Table 6: Ethnicity Breakdown of Consumers New to System of Care System Outflow 776 households (1,072 consumers), or 19% of active households during Q4, exited the system of care and did not reenroll into another program by the end of the reporting period. The exit destinations of consumers leaving the system of care, according to their final exit, are shown in Table 7. Exit destination categories include Temporary settings (emergency shelters not in the HMIS, hospital, jail, staying with friends or family temporarily), Permanent settings (subsidized housing with a move-in date, moving into own unit/house, staying with friends or family Page - 6 - of 15 permanently, nursing home), Unsheltered Destination (last destination recorded was a place not meant for habitation), and Other (consumer deceased or destination unknown). Most system leavers (59% of households with exits) exited to a missing or unknown destination (550 people, 457 households).158 households (294 consumers), or 20% of all household system leavers, exited to a Permanent exit destination in Quarter Four. Another 16% of households exited to a Temporary destination, and 4% to an Unsheltered exit destination. Exit Destination Category Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Temporary 179 127 17% 16% Permanent 294 158 27% 20% Unsheltered 49 34 5% 4% Other/Unknown 550 457 51% 59% Total Deduplicated 1,072 776 100% 100% Table 7: Exit Destinations of Consumers Leaving the System of Care White households were the largest racial group making up system outflow (44% of households exiting the system of care); followed by Black/African American/African (35%). All other racial groups made up 10% or less of system outflow (Table 8). Race of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households White 429 340 40% 44% Black, African American, or African 415 274 39% 35% American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 111 79 10% 10% Multi-Racial 47 33 4% 4% Asian or Asian American 14 12 1% 2% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 25 14 2% 2% Missing 31 24 3% 3% Total Deduplicated 1,072 776 100% 100% Table 8: Race Breakdown of Consumers Exiting the System of Care Page - 7 - of 15 Non-Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) households made up 76% of the system outflow; 22% were Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x), (Table 9). Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) made up a greater proportion of exits from the CoC (22%) than system utilizers (17%). Ethnicity of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Non-Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) 798 594 74% 76% Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) 257 1167 24% 22% Missing 17 15 2% 2% Total Deduplicated 1,072 776 100% 100% Table 9: Ethnicity Breakdown of Consumers Exiting the System of Care Returns to Homelessness 24 households (32 consumers) returned as literally homeless to the CoC in Q4 of 2021. A return as literally homeless included anyone who enrolled in a Literally Homeless program within two years from their last exit to a Permanent destination. Because the number of people/households returning each quarter is small, proportions of returns by race and ethnicity will be more pronounced and will fluctuate significantly each quarter. Please keep this in mind as conclusions are drawn potentially indicating disparities. White households made up a greater proportion of people returning to the system (71%) and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander made up 25%. No head of household from other racial groups returned to the crisis response from a previous permanent housing exit (Table 10). Again, these numbers are too low to draw comparisons to other data in this report. Page - 8 - of 15 Race of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households* % of Consumers % of Households* White 17 17 53% 71% Black, African American, or African 3 0 9% 0% American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 1 0 3% 0% Multi-Racial 3 0 9% 0% Asian or Asian American 0 0 0% 0% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 7 6 22% 25% Missing 1 1 3% 4% Total Deduplicated 32 24 100% 100% *Household data is based on the HoH. Table 10: Race Breakdown of Consumers Returning to System of Care Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) made up 54% of the system returners (13 households, Table 11). Ethnicity of All Consumers Number of Consumers Number of Households % of Consumers % of Households Non-Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) 16 11 50% 46% Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) 6 13 50% 54% Missing 0 0 0% 0% Total Deduplicated 32 24 100% 100% Table 11: Ethnicity Breakdown of Consumers Returning to System of Care Overview of System Utilization Summarizing the Quarter Four findings presented above, the system of care was comprised of 4,061 households and 5,163 consumers. There were 629 households (905 consumers) entering the system of care and 776 households (1,072 consumers) which exited the system of care. 24 households (32 consumers) returned within 24 months (Figure 1). Page - 9 - of 15 Figure 1: Overview of System Utilization Unique Households) There are differences by race and ethnicity for system utilizers, new-to-system, outflow, and returns to the homelessness system of care (Figure 2): • White households made up 45% of system utilizers, 35% of new-to-system, 44% of outflow, and 71% of returns. The lower percent of new-to-system than system utilizers suggests that White households had more people who remained in the system for longer periods of time than other racial/ethnic groups. The very few number of households that return to the system within the reporting period make inferences about the data inconclusive. • Black/African American/African households made up 38% of system utilizers, 42% of new-to-system, 35% of outflow, and 0% of returns. There were no differences across the system categories. • American Indian/Alaska Native/Indigenous made up 7% of system utilizers, 10% of new-to-system, 10% of outflow, and 0% of returns. They had higher rates of new-to- system than system utilization and exits/outflow. 24 629 776 4,061 Returns New to System Outflow Total System Utilizers Overview of System Utilizers (Households) Page - 10 - of 15 • People with Multiple Races made up 4% of system utilizers, 3% of new-to-system, 4% of outflow, and 0% of returns. There were no differences across the system categories. • Asian/Asian American households made up 2% of system utilizers, 2% of new-to- system, 3% of outflow, and 0% of returns. There were no differences across the system categories. • Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander households made up 1% of system utilzers, 2% of new-to-system, 2% of outflow, and 25% of returns. The very few number of households that return to the system within the reporting period make inferences about the data inconclusive. • Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x) households made up 17% of system utilizers, 22% of new-to- system, 22% of outflow, and 46% of returns. The higher proportion of new-to-system and outflow than system utilizers suggest that this population moves in and out of the system faster than other racial/ethnic groups. The very few number of households that return to the system within the reporting period make inferences about the data inconclusive. Page - 11 - of 15 Figure 2: System Utilization by Race & Ethnicity 45% 38% 7% 4%2% 1% 17% 35% 42% 10% 3%2% 2% 22% 44% 35% 10% 4%3%2% 22% 71% 0%0%0%0% 25% 54% White Black African American African American Indian Alaska Native Indigenous Multi-Racial Asian Asian American Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander Hispanic/ Latin(a)(o)(x) Race and Ethnicity Across User Type System Utilizers New to System Outflow Returns Page - 12 - of 15 Review of 2021 Quarterly Trends A comprehensive analysis of 2021 system utilizers, inflow, outflow, returns, and race/ethnicity differences will be provided in the 2021 annual report. As a preliminary review, the four quarterly reports were compared to identify trends or noteworthy shifts. The take-aways are provided below. • Data quality and completeness for each quarterly report is impacted by how many days the report is run after the quarter ended. This real-time data changes after each quarter due to auto-exits and data cleaning. The number of system utilizers and people in outflow is greater when the report is run soon after the quarter ended. For this reason, program and policy decisions should rely on annual data instead of quarterly data. • Race and ethnicity make-up did not vary from quarter to quarter across system utilizers, inflow, or outflow. Variations in race/ethnicity among returners varied, likely due to the small number of people/households each quarter returning to the system from permanent housing. For this reason, program and policy decisions that focus on households returning to the system should rely on annual data instead of quarterly data. • The number of system utilizers was similar from quarter to quarter and did not appear to have seasonal differences. • Inflow varied from 538 households during Q2 to 629 in Quarters 1 and 4. • Outflow varied from 421 households in Q1 to 1,003 in Q2 (again, the lower outflow may have been a result of running the report soon after the quarter ended). • The different between inflow and outflow was greatest in Q2 with 495 households added to the system of care. Page - 13 - of 15 Methods & Definitions How to Use This Report • The report analyzes “real-time” data that changes as people enter and exit new programs. The quality and completeness of the data is impacted by the amount of time between the end of the quarter and the data-run date. For Quarter 4, the report was prepared 47 days after the end of the quarter. • As the methodology to pull and analyze the BOS quarterly data continues to be refined and improved, we recommend not drawing conclusions based on previous BOS quarter data. An annual report summarizing all quarters will be published in early 2022 that will provide insight on these four primary indicators over an annual basis. Further, the HMIS is a live and shared database; numbers are potentially subject to minor fluctuations at any given time, should the report be rerun for the same time period. This could be due to retroactive data entry or data clean-up work. Head of Household (HoH) • The Head of Household (HoH) is one member of a household to whom all other household members can be associated. A household can be a single individual or a group of persons who apply together to a continuum project for assistance and who live together in one dwelling unit, or, for persons who are not housed, who would live together in one dwelling unit if they were housed. For the purpose of this report, the demographic data of the HoH represents the entire household. • Sometimes consumers enroll in a program with a household and enroll in another program as a single adult. They are reflected in both the household count and the consumer count. • Household data is determined by the HoH, including demographics such as race and ethnicity. Race Definitions (as defined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development) • American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous: A person having origins to any of the indigenous peoples of North and South America, including Central America. • Asian or Asian American: A person having origins of Asian descent, including but not limited to Chinese, Indian, Japanese, Korean, Pakistani, Vietnamese, or another representative nation/region. • Black, African American, or African: A person having origins to any of the Black racial groups of Africa, including Afro-Caribbean. • Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: A person having origins in any of the indigenous peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or another Pacific Island. • Multi-Racial: A person who identifies as more than one race. • White: A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. Page - 14 - of 15 Ethnicity • Hispanic/Latin(a)(o)(x): A person of Central American, Latin American, or South American origin, separate from race. Deduplication Strategies—intervention levels, outflow, new-to-system, returners • Consumers and households may enter multiple programs within the same intervention level, or even across intervention levels, resulting in multiple enrollments over the course of a report period. This requires manually removing duplicate enrollments. When removing duplicate enrollments across intervention levels, we chose enrollments in Literally Homeless over Prevention and Diversion or Permanent Supportive Housing. For the outflow, new-to-system, and return analyses, the order of deduplication did not impact the results as we simply needed to know the number of consumers/households. Intervention Levels • Intervention Levels included in this report are 1) Prevention and Diversion, 2) Literally Homeless, and 3) Permanent Housing. Coordinated Entry has been excluded from this analysis due to pending system wide decisions around inclusion/exclusion criteria, as well as data completion concerns. The system utilization numbers in this report will be noticeably lower compared to Quarter 1, which did include Coordinated Entry program data. o Prevention and Diversion:  An enrollment into a Homeless Prevention or Diversion program o Literally Homeless:  An enrollment in Emergency Shelter, Transitional Housing, or Street Outreach  An enrollment in a Services Only project with no move-in date recorded, and with a housing status not equal to “stably housed”  Rapid Rehousing or Permanent Supportive Housing if the household does not have a move-in date o Permanent Housing:  An enrollment in Rapid Rehousing or Permanent Supportive Housing with a move-in date  An enrollment in Street Outreach or Services Only project while stably housed, according to the housing status question Exit Destination Categories • The specific exit destinations that fall under each category are listed below: o Temporary:  Emergency shelter not in HMIS, including hotel or motel paid for with emergency shelter voucher, or RHY-funded Host Home shelter, Hospital or other residential non- psychiatric medical facility, Host Home (non-crisis), Hotel or motel paid for without Page - 15 - of 15 emergency shelter voucher, Moved from one HOPWA funded project to HOPWA TH, Jail, prison or juvenile detention facility, Psychiatric hospital or other psychiatric facility, Staying or living with family, temporary tenure (e.g. room, apartment or house), Staying or living with friends, temporary tenure (e.g. room, apartment or house), Transitional housing for homeless persons (including homeless youth) not in HMIS, Safe Haven, Residential project or halfway house with no homeless criteria, Substance abuse treatment facility or detox center. o Permanent:  Long-term care facility or nursing home, Rental by client in a public housing unit, Rental by client, no ongoing housing subsidy, Rental by client, with GPD TIP housing subsidy, Owned by client, no ongoing housing subsidy, Owned by client, with ongoing housing subsidy, Moved from one HOPWA funded project to HOPWA PH, Rental by client, with HCV voucher (tenant or project based), Rental by client, with other ongoing housing subsidy, Rental by client, with RRH or equivalent subsidy, Rental by client, with VASH housing subsidy, Permanent housing (other than RRH) for formerly homeless persons, Staying or living with friends, permanent tenure, Foster care home or foster care group home, Staying or living with family, permanent tenure. All of these exits must have a move-in date. o Unsheltered:  Place not meant for habitation (e.g., a vehicle, an abandoned building, bus/train/subway station/airport or anywhere outside). o Other/Unknown:  Client doesn't know, Client refused, Data not collected, Deceased, Other, or No exit interview completed. COH QUARTERLY REPORT 7 APPENDIX B Commonly Used Acronyms and Terms Acronym Definition APR Annual Performance Report (for HUD homeless programs) BOS Board of Supervisors (Contra Costa County) BCSH California Business Consumer, Services and Housing Agency CARE Coordinated Assessment and Resource CCACS/CCYCS Contra Costa Adult Continuum of Service/ Contra Costa Youth Continuum of Services (H3 programs) CDBG, CDBG-CV Community Development Block Grant (federal and state programs) and the federal Community Development Block Grant CARES Act coronavirus allocation. CESH California Emergency Solutions and Housing program (state funding) COH Council on Homelessness Continuum of Care (CoC) Continuum of Care approach to assistance to the homeless. Federal grant program promoting and funding permanent solutions to homelessness. Con Plan Consolidated Plan, a locally developed plan for housing assistance and urban development under CDBG. CES/CE Coordinated Entry CNWS Concord Naval Weapons Station CORE Coordinated Outreach Referral, Engagement program COVID-19 Coronavirus DCD Contra Costa Department of Conservation and Development DOC Department Operations Center CDSS California Department of Social Services EHSD (Contra Costa County) Employment and Human Services Division EOC Emergency Operations Center ESG and ESG- CV Emergency Solutions Grant (federal and state program) and the federal Emergency Solutions Grant CARES Act coronavirus allocation. FMR Fair Market Rent (maximum rent for Section 8 rental assistance/CoC grants) HCD Housing and Community Development (State office) HCFC Housing Coordinating and Financing Council (state governing board under BCSH) HEAP Homeless Emergency Aid Program (state funding) HEARTH Homeless Emergency and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act of 2009 HHAP Homeless Housing and Assistance Program (state funding); COH QUARTERLY REPORT 8 HMIS Homeless Management Information System HOME Home Investment Partnerships (CPD program) Homekey California funding to support development of interim and permanent housing HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (federal) MHSA Mental Health Services Act NOFA Notice of Funding Availability PHA Public Housing Authority Project Roomkey COVID-related State funding program to support decongregating homeless shelters using hotels/motels. PSH Permanent Supportive Housing PUI Persons Under Investigation RFP/RFQ/LOI Request for Proposal/Request for Qualifications/Letter of Intent related to funding opportunities RRH Rapid Rehousing SAMHSA Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration SRO Single-Room Occupancy housing units SSDI Social Security Disability Income SSI Supplemental Security Income TA Technical Assistance TAY Transition Age Youth (usually ages 16-24) VA Veterans Affairs (U.S. Department of) VASH Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing VI-SPDAT Vulnerability Index – Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool Contra Costa County COVID-19 Resources: Please see below for additional resources on COVID-19. Health Services COVID Data Dashboard- https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/dashboard Health Services Homeless Specific Data Dashboard- https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/homeless-dashboar Health Services COVID Updates- https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/health-services-updates Health Services Homeless-Specific COVID Resources -https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/for-the-homeless RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the Health Services Department Public Health Division reports on Family and Human Services Referral Nos.118 Policy Options for Protecting Youth from Tobacco Influences in the Retail Environment and 82 Secondhand Smoke Protections Ordinance, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: Referral No. 112 - Policy Options for Protecting Youth from Tobacco Influences in the Retail Environment The Board of Supervisors approved two tobacco control ordinances in July 2017 to protect youth from tobacco influences in the retail environment: a zoning ordinance and a tobacco retailer licensing ordinance. Of particular concern were the marketing and availability of youth-friendly flavored tobacco products, small pack sizes of cigars and cigarillos, and density and location of tobacco retailers, since these contribute largely to youth exposure to tobacco influences and tobacco use. The tobacco retailer licensing ordinance required extensive preparation for implementation, and tobacco retailers were required to be compliant with the new provisions by January 1, 2018. Health Services Department Public Health staff provided a report to the Board of Supervisors in March 2018 on preliminary implementation efforts. In November 2019, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance 2019-34 (Sale of Electronic Smoking Devices and E-Liquids Prohibited) which increased the protections for youth from tobacco influences in the retail environment. Ordinance 2019-34 was a necessary response to an epidemic rise in youth vaping where young people were vulnerable to tobacco addiction as well as concerns related to E-cigarette/Vaping Associated Lung Injury (EVALI). The ordinance also expanded the restrictions on the sale of flavored tobacco in all areas of the unincorporated areas of the County, rather than just within 1,000 feet of youth-sensitive areas. At the October 29, 2020 Family and Human Services Committee (FHS) meeting, Public Health staff reported on the implementation of the newly adopted Ordinance 2019-34, including information on strategies to continue tobacco retailer licensing and businesses zoning ordinance implementation activities despite the challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Enid Mendoza, (925) 655-2051 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 77 To:Board of Supervisors From:FAMILY & HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Tobacco Retail License and Secondhand Smoke Ordinance Updates BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Referral No. 82 - Secondhand Smoke Ordinance At the November 13, 2017 Family and Human Services Committee meeting, Public Health presented its annual report on the implementation of the County’s Secondhand Smoke ordinance with a recommendation that the Committee consider a proposed ordinance to strengthen the current smoking protections to prohibit smoking inside dwelling units of multi-unit housing, including condos and townhomes. The Committee accepted the report and recommendations, requested that language be added to extend smoking restrictions to guest rooms of hotels and motels, and directed staff to forward those recommendations to the Board of Supervisors for discussion and approval. The ordinance, titled Smoke-free Multi Unit Residences, was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on March 13, 2018 with implementation to begin for new and renewing leases on July 1, 2018, and for continuing leases and owner-occupied units on July 1, 2019. At the request of the Board of Supervisors, Contra Costa Public Health staff provided reports in March 2018 on preliminary implementation of the ordinances. A follow-up report was later presented to the FHS in October of 2018, at which time the FHS asked Public Health staff to send a letter to each City Manager inviting them to model their own city ordinances after the County's ordinance. At the October 29, 2020 FHS meeting, Public Health staff reported on the implementation of the Secondhand Smoke Protections Ordinance. The report included updates on the implementation of the Multi-Unit Housing Ordinance, compliance challenges, and the technical assistance provided to cities within Contra Costa County. At the February 28, 2022 FHS meeting, the attached reports and presentation slides for updates on the implementation of Tobacco Retail Licensing Ordinance No. 2019-34 and Secondhand Smoke Protections Ordinance No. 2018-07 were received and staff was directed to forward the information to the Board of Supervisors for its information. The delay getting the report to the Board of Supervisors is due to administrative staff oversight after FHS approval. Committee staff are reviewing all FHS-approved items to be forwarded to the Board, and has improved its tracking tool to ensure these delays do not occur in the future. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The reports will not be received. ATTACHMENTS Referral Reports Presentation Tobacco Retail License Report Secondhand Smoke Protections Report CONTRA COSTA HEALTH SERVICESDIVISION OF PUBLIC HEALTHTOBACCO PREVENTION PROGRAMANNUAL REPORT Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Family & Human Services Committee February 28, 2022 TOBACCO RETAILER LICENSE ORDINANCE 2019 -34 The Board of Supervisors Adopted Ordinance 2019-34 (Sale of Electronic Smoking Devices and E-Liquids Prohibited) in November 2019. Included in the ordinance: •No sale of flavored tobacco (including menthol) •No sale of e-cigarette/vaping devices •Little cigars sold in packs of at least 10 •No new tobacco retailers within 1,000 ft of youth sensitive areas or 500 ft of another retailer •Prohibits coupons •Set a cap on tobacco retailers Current TRL Policy Landscape Technical Assistance & Enforcement TOBACCO PREVENTION PROJECT PROVIDES: •Tobacco Education •Compliance Checks •Technical Assistance SMOKE FREE MULTI -UNIT HOUSING A 100% smoke -free multi -unit housing policy for unincorporated areas within Contra Costa was adopted on March 13, 2018, implemented through December 2021. SMOKE FREE MULTI -UNIT HOUSING COMPLAINTS 2020 -2021 OUTREACH & EDUCATIONSMOKE FREE MULTI -UNIT HOUSING MEDIA CAMPAIGN •7.8 million impressions through digital platforms •1.7 million impressions through streaming radio •585,562 impressions through Univision Spanish TV •795 airings on Galavision Current SFMUH Policy Landscape Thank You! To: Family and Human Services Committee, Contra Costa Board of Supervisors From: Ori Tzvieli, MD, Health Officer, Contra Costa County Public Health Director, Contra Costa Health Services Re: Annual Report on Implementation of Tobacco Retail Licensing Ordinance 2019 -34 Date: 02/28/22 I.Summary The Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance 2019-34 (Sale of Electronic Smoking Devices and E-Liquids Prohibited) in November 2019 which strengthened protections for youth against tobacco influences in the retail environment. The alarming rise of vaping among vulnerable youth who are more susceptible to tobacco addiction, in conjunction with the E- cigarette/Vaping Associated Lung Injury (EVALI) epidemic made addressing this public health concern through policies such as Ordinance 2019-34 even more necessary and timely. In addition to the above, the ordinance expanded restrictions on the sale of flavored tobacco in all unincorporated areas of the County, as opposed to only within 1,000 feet of youth- sensitive areas. Contra Costa Health Services’ Tobacco Prevention Program facilitates implementation of this ordinance through programmatic activities and by supporting the Contra Costa Sheriff’s Department with enforcement. This report will provide details of implementation of the Ordinance 2019-34, specifically activities conducted since the last report made to this committee in October 2020, notwithstanding the challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic. II.Tobacco Retailer License Ordinance Background On September 10, 2019, the Board of Supervisors directed Public Health staff to prepare policy options that would address mounting concerns related to the rapid increase of use with electronic cigarettes by minors as well as the co-occurring epidemic of serious lung disease that has been linked to the use of vaping devices. On November 19, 2019, Public Health staff provided the policy recommendations listed below: 1.Revise Division 445 (Secondhand Smoke and Tobacco Product Control) of the County Ordinance Code to prohibit the sale of any electronic smoking device or e-liquid that is required to obtain, but has not yet obtained, a premarket review order from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration pursuant to the federal Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. 2.Revise Section 445-6.006 of the County Ordinance Code to prohibit the sale of flavored tobacco products and menthol cigarettes expanding this prohibition to the entirety of the unincorporated county. Previously, the sale of these products was only prohibited within 1,000 feet of a public or private school, playground, park, or library. 3. Amend Section 413-4.608 (Retail sale standards - Commercial Cannabis Health Permits) of the County Ordinance Code to prohibit the sale or delivery of any e-liquid that contains tetrahydrocannabinol or any other cannabinoid, and to prohibit the sale or delivery of any electronic smoking device that can be used to deliver tetrahydrocannabinol or any other cannabinoid in aerosolized or vaporized form. Public Health’s Tobacco Prevention Program (TPP) Staff partnered with Contra Costa County’s Department of Conservation and Development, Alcohol and Other Drugs Services (AODS), the Contra Costa County Office of Education Tobacco Use Prevention Education Program (TUPE) and community partners to inform community members about the upcoming policy. The Tobacco Prevention Coalition (TPC) and partners educated members of the community, especially the youth, on the positive impact of the proposed policy recommendations. More than 25 community members provided public testimony or wrote letters of support for the expansion of restrictions of the tobacco retailer license ordinance, most of which were youth who experienced the negative health effects of vaping amongst their friends and classmates. Ordinance 2019-34 was adopted by the Board of Supervisors unanimously on November 19, 2019. Implementation of the amended ordinance began April 1, 2020. III.Implementation efforts since October 2020 report to the FHS Committee Implementation of Ordinance 2019-34 TPP Staff created a comprehensive strategy to inform the retailers and the public of the upcoming changes on the sale of flavored tobacco and vaping devices in the unincorporated areas of the County. The strategy includ ed community presentations, social media posts on the Tobacco Coalition’s (TPC) Facebook and Instagram, and informational mailers that were sent to all retailers in the unincorporated County. In February 2021, TPP along with CCHS’s Nutrition and Physical Activity Promotion Project, HIV/STD Prevention Program, Alcohol and Other Drugs Services Program hosted a “State of The Retail Environment In Contra Costa County” to share the California Department of Public Health’s Healthy Stores For A Healthy Community (HSHC) campaign results. TPP implemented the HSHC survey tool with 383 of the 666 tobacco retailers in Contra Costa. Of those surveys collected, 183 were analyzed by the CCHS Epidemiology, Planning and Evaluation team and California Tobacco Control Program. Following the Town Hall of February 2021, the HSHC Taskforce continues to meet monthly and based on community engagement and needs assessment, further analyzed data from 13 of the Bay Point tobacco retailers. The following were the results for Bay Point tobacco retailers: •More than 75% sell flavored tobacco products compared to 23% of tobacco retailers surveyed sell fresh fruits and vegetables •Nearly 77% sell alcohol while 15% sell non- or low-fat milk •100% sell unhealthy items such as chips and sodas •Only 31% have storefront advertising for healthy products, but 2x more (62%) have advertising for unhealthy products including tobacco products, alcohol or sugary drinks •Nearly 23% have ads for tobacco products in kid-friendly locations (either within 3 feet of candy or below 3 feet) Additional data collection from the 13 Bay Point tobacco retailers, and other stores in Bay Point and close to the border (total of 27), is expected to occur between March and May 2022 to engage Bay Point residents and retailers to gather information on the items above and increase collaboration with store owners. The HSHC Taskforce is expected to hold ‘Bay Point Town Hall’ to share the findings in May 2022. Annually TPP works with the Contra Costa County Business License Office and the Tax Collector's Office to send a mailing that includes a reminder to all tobacco retailers to renew their business license and any policy change that affects the retailers. In May 2021, the Business License Office mailed the annual business renewal reminder letters to all 84 tobacco retailers in unincorporated Contra Costa. Enforcement of Ordinance 2019-34 In previous years, TPP Staff have assisted the Sheriff’s Department in completing compliance checks. As the impacts of COVID-19 pandemic continued through much of 2021, TPP Staff delayed in-person activities, such as youth decoy and shoulder tap operations. However, through funding from the California Department of Justice, TPP was able to perform local tobacco control policy enforcement activities complementary to those enforcement activ ities under the purview of the Sheriff’s Department through June 2021. April 2021 through June 2021, fifty retailers were contacted by phone to participate in pre and post-test surveys and received educational packets by mail. While roughly 1% participated in the pre-test which focused on flavored products, legal age of sale, and electronic smoking devices, 70% of the retailer’s responded to the post-test, with half of those scoring 100% demonstrating the effectiveness of this alternative strategy in ensuring that retailers are educated about and understand current tobacco control policies. A Youth Taskforce was formed through funding from the California Department of Justice and 8 youth/young adults were trained to educate their peers about the negative health effects of the use of tobacco and tobacco products. Five presentations educating youth about the dangers of vaping at Diablo Valley College and with community organizations were conducted between February 2021 and June 2021. IV.Technical Assistance to Contra Costa Cities TPP Staff continue to offer comprehensive technical assistance to Contra Costa cities interested in considering tobacco control policies that prohibit the sale of flavored tobacco products and e- cigarettes or vaping devices in order to protect youth from the negative health effects associated with the use of these products, such as EVALI. Over the past year, the following cities have either adopted or are considering expanding their tobacco retail control policies employing the Contra Costa County ordinance as a model: City Policy Description Date adopted/ Date effective Antioch Adopt comprehensive tobacco retailer license with a flavors restriction and a minimum pack size requirement Antioch’s City Council directed staff to develop draft ordinance (similar to County’s policy) in May 2021/ 1st reading of TRL ordinance pending Pittsburg Adopt a comprehensive tobacco retailer license ordinance inclusive of flavored tobacco restrictions and a minimum pack size requirement Community partners presented to Pittsburg City Council in May 2021/ Staff has been directed to review and update all tobacco policies including SHS and retail in February 2022/ Draft ordinance pending Danville Prohibits the sale of vaping devices and electronic smoking devices February 18, 2020/ March 18, 2020 Concord Adopt comprehensive tobacco retailer restrictions that are inclusive of flavored tobacco restrictions and a minimum price Survey of tobacco products in Concord tobacco retailers conducted in December 2021/ Presentation to Concord Council expected Summer 2022 San Ramon Comprehensive tobacco retail license with vaping sales restrictions, minimum pack size, minimum price, tobacco free pharmacies, no exemptions San Ramon youth, community partners, and TPP Staff provided education to Policy Standing Committee January 2022/Draft Ordinance pending (possibly March 2022) Walnut Creek Adopt tobacco retail license with same exemptions as SB 793 (hookah, pipe tobacco, and roll your own tobacco leaves exempt from flavors restrictions) Adopted November 9, 2021 Implemented April 9, 2022 Pleasant Hill Adopt flavored tobacco sales restriction and vaping device sales ban with same exemptions as SB 793 (hookah, pipe tobacco, and roll your own tobacco leaves exempt from flavors restrictions) Adopted February 7, 2022/ Implemented January 2023, consideration will be given in March 2022 to revise cigar definition. V.Technical Assistance on Vaping Policies On June 26, 2018, the Board of Supervisors adopted cannabis land use Ordinance Nos. 2018-18 and 2018-19 to regulate commercial cannabis activities and personal cannabis cultivation in unincorporated Contra Costa County, including requiring land use permits to engage in commercial cannabis activities. Considering the newness of regulating the commercial cannabis industry and the evolving landscape of cannabis regulation, Contra Costa Health Services recommended a cautionary approach to local regulation that emphasizes protections for consumers, the public, and at-risk groups such as youth and individuals challenged with substance use disorders. In November 2019, Ordinance 2019-34 was introduced and subsequently adopted amending three sections of County code to bring alignment between County Tobacco Control Policy and Cannabis regulation. In particular, the provision prohibiting the sale of flavored cannabis products and any electronic smoking device that contains tetrahydrocannabinol or any other cannabinoid. At the request of the Board of Supervisors, in May 2021 and July 2021 TPP Staff provided reports on the Triangulum between tobacco, cannabis and electronic smoking or vape devices, current trends in use among youth, and the negative health impacts associated with the use of vape devices, in particularly among vulnerable populations such as underage youth. In August 2020, California became only the second state to ban the sale of flavored tobacco products including flavored electronic cigarettes through SB793. What was expected to be implemented in January 2021, due the tobacco industry filling a referendum, subsequently SB793 will be placed on the ballot for November 2022 to let voters decide whether it is to be implemented. With the support of the Board of Supervisors, the Contra Costa Tobacco Prevention Program continues to advance tobacco prevention policies and responds to various requests to provide technical assistance to other local public health departments for both tobacco and the emerging issue of cannabis, throughout the State, including Alameda, Sonoma, Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, and San Diego Counties. Technical assistance includes sharing best practices on the adoption, implementation, and enforcement of local tobacco prevention ordinances. VI.Recommendations Direct staff to track SB 793 referendum, and to keep the Committee informed of any changes that result in the November 2022 election. Staff recommends that the Family and Human Services Committee accept the report and direct staff to continue to provide updates on implementation of the ordinance as part of staff’s annual report on the County’s Tobacco Retail Licensing Ordinance. To: Family and Human Services Committee, Contra Costa Board of Supervisors From: Ori Tzvieli, MD Health Officer, Contra Costa County Public Health Director, Contra Costa Health Services Re: Annual Report on Implementation of Secondhand Smoke Protections Ordinance 2018 -07 Date: 2/28/22 I. Summary The Contra Costa Board of Supervisors adopted Smoke-free Multi Unit Residences Ordinance 2018 -07 on March 13, 2018, which increased secondhand smoke protections for persons and families living within multiunit housing. Implementation of Ordinance 2018-07 for new and renewing leases began on July 1, 2018, whereas for continuing leases and owner -occupied units, implementation would start on July 1, 2019. This brief report is specific to the continued implementation of the broader Smoke-free Secondhand Protections (Division 445 - 4) and the modified strategies utilized to continue activities as the project continues to be impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. II. Secondhand Smoke Ordinance Background Across the State of California, and nationally, Contra Costa County continues to be recognized as a leader in developing and implementing local tobacco control policies. The County’s secondhand smoke protections have continuously been updated and strengthened by the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors for more than a decade, with additional policies being adopted in October 2009, October 2010, April 2013, June 2014, July 2017, and March 2018. Amendments to the County’s Secondhand Smoke policy (Division 445-4) have expanded secondhand smoke protections and include the following: requiring all County-owned properties be 100% smoke-free; the inclusion of electronic smoking devices in defining “secondhand smoke”; and the expansion of 100% smoke- free multi-unit housing to include condos, townhomes, and the guest rooms of hotels and motels. III. Implementation of Ordinance 2018-07 Since October 2020 Report The Smoke-free Multi-Unit Residence Ordinance 2018-07 is implemented through the activities of the Tobacco Prevention Program for the Public Health Division of Contra Costa Health Services. As our communities continue to experience unusual circumstances as a result of the COVID -19 pandemic, many activities normally conducted by TPP have been modified in order to adhere to guidance issued by the Contra Costa County Health Officer. Since the begi nning of the pandemic TPP Staff have continued to respond to secondhand smoke complaints received through the TPP online portal and complaint line . The team also provided education to community members about smoke-free multiunit housing tobacco control policies. However, staff were unable to conduct site-visits since our last report for signage observations to ensure adherence to the COVID-19 guidelines. TPP Staff made its last report to the Family and Human Services Committee in October 20 20. The following is a summary of activities conducted November 2020 through September 2021. TPP will be collecting and analyzing data from October 2021 – December 2021 that will be provided in the next report. The COVID-19 pandemic initially brought with it an increase in secondhand smoke complaints when the Contra Costa County Health Officer Orders to shelter in place and limit activities outside of their homes in March 2020. At the time of our last report, in October 2020, TPP received a total of 49 secondhand smoke complaints from residents and landlords within the unincorporated areas and ci ties throughout the County which was double the amount received the previous year. From November 2020 -September 2021, the numbers have continued to increase following a similar pattern with 92 second-hand smoke complaints being registered with TPP. All registered complaints are provided with appropriate resources and a follow-up call or email within 3-5 business days to ensure the health and safety of residents are not compromised due to a lack of adherence to secondhand smoke tobacco control policies. TPP Staff primarily focus on complaints from the unincorporated County and making connections to the appropriate department of local jurisdictions outside of the Coun ty’s purview. Graph I: Percentage breakdown of number of complaints within 2020-2021 In reviewing the 92 complaints, a significant number of complainants (25%) inquired about the secondhand smoke violation policy and/or the violation process but did not want provide information regarding their specific location or they did not respond when staff attempted to communicate with them. Over half (51%) were secondhand smoke violations within apartment complexes, 32% were in owner - occupied units such as townhomes and condominiums, and less than 5% came from other multi-unit housing types such as mobile homes parks, duplexes, etc. Seventy-four percent of the complaints were regarding Antioch 2%Bay Point 9%Brentwood 1% Clayton 1% Concord 13% El Cerrito 2% El Sobrante 1% Hercules 5% Martinez 8% Out of County 1%Pacheco 2%Pittsburg 5% Pleasant Hill 4% Richmond 5% San Pablo 3% Unknown 25% Walnut Creek 11% PERCENTAGE OF SFMUH COMPLAINTS (NOVEMBER 2020 -SEPTEMBER 2021) combustible cigarette smoke, while 26% per tained to second-hand smoke from the use of cannabis and electronic cigarettes devices. TPP staff also received requests for clarification of the ordinance and technical assistance by landlords and property managers seeking to comply with the ordinance. IV. Next Steps for Compliance Due to the impact of COVID-19, inspections were not conducted during this report period, but the implementation of additional strategies that were recommended in the October 2020 report designed to strengthen our outreach efforts and increase awareness by informing and educating landlords, property managers and tenants were implemented from the end of Fall 2020 through the Summer of 2021. In 2020, in an effort to increase awareness and compliance, a secondhand smoke educational infographic flyer was distributed to property managers, property owners and operators in English and Spanish at all 5,035 multi - unit dwelling properties (two or more units such as duplexes, triplexes, condominiums, detached units, apartment complexes, etc.) in unincorporated county on 03/18/2021. Due to a significant number of inaccurate mailing addresses, approximately 100-200 flyers were returned to the program without forwa rding addresses. In addition, the project’s inability to obtain all unit numbers for the larger complexes required TPP staff to mail SFMUH educational postcards directly to SFMUH property managers, owners and landlords with the request to have them distributed to residents. These post cards in English and Spanish includes details regarding compliance, the complaint process and cessation resources. Resources and downloadable smoke- free signs in 4 languages continue to be available on the CCHS TPP website. The smoke-free signs highlight that cannabis, vaping, and cigarette smoke is prohibited. Smoke free signage and decals can be provided upon request to all. The secondhand smoke webpage had 984 page views and 915 visitors between January 1, 2021, and June 30, 2021. TPP staff plans to update the webpage to include additional information on other smoke-free MUH policies throughout the county in the future. Unincorporated SFMUH Media Campaign Smoke-free messages that focus on reaching residents in unincorporated Contra Costa are posted regularly on the Tobacco Prevention Coalitions Facebook and Instagram social media platforms in collaboration with TPP Staff. Over the past year, over 64 educational messages about the harmful health effects of second -hand smoke associated with the use of tobacco and tobacco devices were posted on Facebook and Instagram. TPP subcontracted with media consultant Full Court Press to i mplement a media campaign focused on increasing the viewers knowledge regarding the harms of secondhand smoke, an educational digital ad campaign was developed and implemented that achieved millions of impressions. A total of 7.8 million impressions were through digital online platforms, 1.7 million impressions through streaming radio, 585,562 impressions through the Spanish Tv streaming service Univision and 795 airings on Galavision. TPP Staff will continue to respond to requests for resources, assistance and information from residents, property managers and owners by phone and by email. TPP Staff plans to resume auditing and inspecting properties at random to confirm compliance with the smoke -free multiunit housing tobacco control p olicies early 2022 if funding is secured for these activities. V. Technical Assistance to Contra Costa Cities As of January 2022, fourteen (14) cities have adopted smoke-free multiunit housing tobacco control policies into their jurisdictions utilizing the County’s model ordinance. TPP Staff provided technical assistance to these local jurisdictions to incorporate components of the model ordinance and seeks to inform and educate those local jurisdictions that have no tobacco control policy in the hopes that they will consider further the many health benefits for their residents associated with having a in place protective smoke -free multiunit dwelling policies. In 2021, most second-hand smoke complaints came from the cities of Concord, Walnut Creek, and Martinez. TPP staff provided education and resources to community members who filed complaints and forward the complaint to the appropriate contact in those cities when possible. Of the 14 cities that TPP Staff provided technical assistance to the Cities of San Pablo, Richmond, Hercules, Clayton, Walnut Creek, Concord have considered similar smoke-free multi-unit housing policies for their jurisdictions based on the model provided by the County. V. Next Steps for Technical Assistance to Contra Costa Cities TPP Staff plans to continue smoke-free efforts in communities in East Contra Costa in 2022 -2025 to help expand smoke-free protections to residents in the Antioch and Pittsburg com munities. TPP Staff has made moderate progress in Antioch and Pittsburg with informing and educating policymakers on the importance of tobacco retail licensing control policies and additional details will be found in that report. VI. Recommendations TPP Staff requests that the Family and Human Services Committee accept the repor t and direct staff to continue to provide updates on implementation of the ordinance as part of staff’s annual report on Contra Costa’s Secondhand Smoke Protections Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the annual Update on Homeless Continuum of Care report and presentation from the Health, Housing and Homeless Services Division of the Health Services Department, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: In November 2014, the Board approved “Forging Ahead Towards Preventing and Ending Homelessness: An Update to Contra Costa’s 2004 Strategic Plan,” that renewed the County's 2004 plan with the latest data, best practices, and community feedback and reaffirmed the County's commitment to the Housing First approach. As such, “Forging Ahead” establishes this guiding principle: “Homelessness is first a housing issue, and necessary supports and services are critical to help people remain housed. Our system must be nimble and flexible enough to respond through shared responsibility, accountability, and transparency of the community.” The Strategic Plan Update identifies two goals: 1) Decrease the length of time people experience homelessness by focusing on providing Permanent Housing and Services and; 2) Decrease the percentage of people who become homeless by providing Prevention activities. To achieve these goals, three strategies emerged: APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Christy Saxton, (925) 608-6701 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 78 To:Board of Supervisors From:FAMILY & HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Homeless Continuum of Care Annual Update BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) 1. Implement a coordinated entry/assessment system to streamline access to housing and services while addressing barriers, getting the right resources to the right people at the right time; 2. Use best, promising , and most effective practices to give the consumer the best possible experience through the strategic use of resources; and 3. Develop the most effective platforms to provide access, support advocacy, and connect to the community about homelessness and available resources. The Homeless Program of the Health, Housing and Homeless Services Division partners with the Homeless Advisory Board and Continuum of Care to develop and carry out an annual action plan that identifies the objectives and benchmarks related to each of the goals and strategies of Forging Ahead. Further, the Homeless Program incorporates the strategic plan goals into its own delivery system of comprehensive services, interim housing and permanent supportive housing as well as contracting with community agencies to provide additional homeless services and housing with the goal of ending homelessness in our community. On June 27, 2022, the Family and Human Services Committee (FHS) received and approved the attached annual report on the Homeless Continuum of Care and directed staff to forward it to the Board of Supervisors for its information. The delay getting the report to the Board of Supervisors is due to administrative staff oversight after FHS approval. Committee staff are reviewing all FHS approved items to be forwarded to the Board, and has improved its tracking tool to ensure delays do not occur in the future. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Board will not receive the annual update on Homeless Continuum of Care report and presentation from the Health, Housing and Homeless Services Division of the Health Services Department. ATTACHMENTS Annual Update on Homeless Continuum of Care Report Annual Update on Homeless Continuum of Care Presentation Contra Costa Behavorial Health • Contra Costa Emergency Medical Services • Contra Costa Environmental Health • Contra Costa Health Plan • Contra Costa Hazardous Materials • Contra Costa Public Health • Contra Costa Regional Medical Center • Contra Costa Health Centers • Health, Housing and Homeless Services ANNA ROTH, RN, MS, MPH HEALTH SERVICES DIRECTOR CHRISTY SAXTON, MS HEALTH, HOUSING AND HOMELESS SERVICES DIRECTOR Contra Costa Health, Housing and Homeless Services ADMINISTRATION 2400 Bisso Lane, Suite, D 2nd Floor Concord, California 94520-4832 Ph 925-608-6700 Fax 925-608-6741 Date: June 17, 2022 To: Family and Human Services Committee Supervisor Burgis, District III, Chair Supervisor Candace Anderson, District II, Co-Chair From: Christy Saxton, Director, Health, Housing and Homeless Services Division CC: Anna Roth, RN, MS, MPH Health Services Director Subject: Annual Update on Homeless Continuum of Care While the COVID-19 pandemic continued to require attention, the Continuum of Care and Council on Homelessness were able to achieve significant progress since the last presentation by Health, Housing and Homeless Services to the Family and Human Services Committee in October, 2021. ADDING AND IMPROVING CAPACITY Project Room Key: To date, there have been 1,915 people in 1,599 households served in Project RoomKey (PRK) locations across the county. As COVID response and funding is winding down and shelters have reopened, the remaining COVID-19 hotels will be closed as of June 30, 2022. Our team has done a tremendous job both responding to the various spikes as well as working to move people in hotel programs into housing or other shelters in preparation for the closing of the remaining Project Roomkey hotels. Delta Landing: Using state Homekey money, the County purchased the former Motel 6 in Pittsburg and, after renovations, reopened it as an interim housing program named Delta Landing in March 2022. The facility, staffed by Bay Area Community Service (BACS), has 172 resident rooms and an on-site health clinic. Shelter Improvements: During the pandemic shut down, the Concord Shelter, Philip Dorn Respite Center and Concord Service Center as well as the Brookside shelter were remodeled and the sites have since reopened. The Concord Shelter and Brookside Shelter now have individual sleep stations that provide privacy and allow for couples and multigenerational adult households to stay together. The Concord Service Center provides showers, laundry, bathrooms and mail, in addition to an outdoor pocket park with kennels for pets and functions as a Warming Center with 6 beds for individuals who need to come indoors but cannot access a shelter. Vouchers H3 and the Coordinated Entry System supports the Housing Authority of Contra Costa County with the identification and matching of clients for a subset of their housing vouchers, including two new types of vouchers our community received within the past two years: 201 Emergency Housing Vouchers (for individuals and families who are experiencing homelessness; at risk of experiencing homelessness; fleeing, or attempting to flee, domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, or human trafficking; or were recently Contra Costa Behavorial Health • Contra Costa Emergency Medical Services • Contra Costa Environmental Health • Contra Costa Health Plan • Contra Costa Hazardous Materials • Contra Costa Public Health • Contra Costa Regional Medical Center • Contra Costa Health Centers • Health, Housing and Homeless Services homeless and for whom providing rental assistance will prevent the family’s homelessness or having high risk of housing instability) and 100 Mainstream Vouchers (for non-elderly persons with disabilities). COLLABORATIONS Holistic Intervention Partnership (HIP): HIP relies on a public-private partnership between the Contra Costa Office of the Public Defender, multiple county agencies, and community-based partners to provide interdisciplinary case management and navigation services to indigent individuals to ensure timely and coordinated access to a client-centered array of housing, behavioral health, transportation, and legal services at the critical time of initial law enforcement contact. The goal of HIP is to reduce system burden and improve criminal justice outcomes in misdemeanor cases throughout the county. Referred clients have been placed in permanent housing, diverted from entering homelessness or are actively working on housing plans. Homeless Workforce Integration Network (H-WIN): This new meeting series is the product of a collaboration with Workforce Development funded by the Workforce Accelerator Fund 8.0. These bi-monthly meetings provide an opportunity for people working in Homeless Services and Workforce Development in Contra Costa to connect with and understand each other’s resources and services. Four (4) meetings have been held to date, with an average attendance of over 30 people at each meeting. System Partner Map: In late 2021, the CoC launched the Homeless Partner Map which displays connections between homeless services and other partnering services in Contra Costa County. This tool is designed to help local agencies and partners understand how various local systems and partners are currently connected to the homeless system of care. To see the map, go to https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/#Map. SYSTEM INITIATIVES Equity: Using a revised supplemental application and rubric, the Council on Homelessness selected new members for open seats that increased the racial and ethnic diversity and number of people with lived experience. In addition, a technical assistance provider, C4 Innovations, conducted an Equity Assessment of the Homeless System of Care. The Council on Homelessness created a time-limited Equity Working Group to develop a work plan, timeline and recommendations for the Council on Homelessness to operationalize findings from the Equity Assessment. Homelessness Awareness Month: To mark Homelessness Awareness Month (November), the CoC developed a 100+ page toolkit (https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/Homeless-AwarenesToolkit.pdf) , a 5-minute video amplifying the voices of people with lived experience of homelessness (https://spark.adobe.com/video/g8uFATP1cNCaI), recognized over 50 outstanding individuals and agencies impacting homelessness (https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/awards.php), presented to the Board of Supervisors and hosted a the CoC Learning Hub: "Hearing Other People's Experiences (H.O.P.E.) Beyond Homelessness”, a panel discussion featuring people with lived experience in our community. A recording of the Learning Hub can be viewed here: https://youtu.be/1-V9Su8fnUc. Regional Action Plan: In April 2021, the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors committed to the Regional Action plan, which aims to reduce unsheltered homelessness by 75% by 2024. The Regional Action Plan proposes a 1- 2-4 framework which posits that to accomplish this reduction, for every 1 additional interim housing unit funded, 2 permanent housing solutions, and 4 prevention interventions are needed. The Council on Homelessness developed the Plan for Accelerating Transformative Housing (PATH) Innovations Committee of diverse stakeholders to look at the Regional Action Plan 1:2:4 cost/gaps analysis model and utilize Contra Costa Behavorial Health • Contra Costa Emergency Medical Services • Contra Costa Environmental Health • Contra Costa Health Plan • Contra Costa Hazardous Materials • Contra Costa Public Health • Contra Costa Regional Medical Center • Contra Costa Health Centers • Health, Housing and Homeless Services improvement science techniques to test the effectiveness of selected interventions. H3 is looking forward to collaborating with the other County departments needed to operationalize and implement this action plan. System Improvement - Program Models: Through an extensive community input process, the homeless system of care built a collective definition of each program type for the CoC Written Standards that will form the basis of provider contracts and the performance benchmarks expected. Finalized program models will be incorporated into the CoC Written Standards as well as in the Coordinated Entry Policies and Procedures in the spring, with final incorporations into CoC contracts by July 2022. - Monitoring: In February, the CoC launched a Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Compliance Monitoring Process for 19 CoC-funded providers. The purpose of monitoring is to ensure grant activities are following the HUD rules and regulations; improve individual program performance; and increase provider capacity regarding Continuum of Care compliance and financial management. Homebase, a contracted technical assistance provider, is leading the 2022 monitoring process, has completed its document review and is held virtual monitoring site visits with each of the Continuum of Care-funded projects during the first two weeks of June. - Coordinated Entry System Evaluation: An evaluation of our Coordinated Entry System was conducted to identify opportunities to improve the efficiency and effectiveness in connecting people seeking homeless services with permanent housing, a key driver in reducing unsheltered homelessness. Implementation of the finding will begin in the coming months. Point in Time Count - The Point in Time Count, a comprehensive point-in-time count of families and individuals experiencing homelessness in Contra Costa, tallies information about people sleeping in emergency shelters and transitional housing as well as people sleeping in cars, in abandoned properties, or in other places not meant for human habitation. This year, the sheltered count took place on the night of February 23rd and the unsheltered count, supported by over 140 volunteers and staff, took place in the early morning hours on February 24th. The results estimate that 3,093 people were staying in shelter beds or living outdoors in Contra Costa during the count, compared to 2,295 in 2019. A full data set that includes jurisdiction level numbers will be made available later this summer. FUNDING The Continuum of Care continues to focus on utilizing one time/short term funding first, while developing strategies to use longer term funding for things like building infrastructure. The state and federal government continue to release funding to address housing and homelessness through multiple channels and into multiple entities at the County level, including directly to cities, through the Behavioral Health Division, Employment and Human Services Department, the Department of Conservation and Development, reentry programs and more. Stronger collaboration and coordination between these entities is needed to maximize the effectiveness of this funding. Federal - Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Continuum of Care (CoC) funding: This year Contra Costa was awarded $16,848,402 through of HUD CoC funding, which included a $716,332 Domestic Violence bonus allocation for a new project called “Project Home SAFE”. The HUD CoC funding pays for supportive housing programs like Permanent Supportive Housing and Rapid Rehousing, Contra Costa Behavorial Health • Contra Costa Emergency Medical Services • Contra Costa Environmental Health • Contra Costa Health Plan • Contra Costa Hazardous Materials • Contra Costa Public Health • Contra Costa Regional Medical Center • Contra Costa Health Centers • Health, Housing and Homeless Services management and maintenance of the Homeless Management Information System and our Coordinated Entry System, which streamlined the intake, assessment, and referral of over 3,000 people last year to homeless system resources. - Transitional Living Program (TLP): H3 submitted an application for this funding in June 2022. TLP funding helps provide safe, stable, and appropriate shelter for runaway and homeless youth ages 16 to under 22 for up to 18 months and, under extenuating circumstances, can be extended to 21 months. STATE - Encampment Resolution: The City of Richmond was among 19 communities in California to receive funding from the state to address encampments. Richmond will receive $4.8 million in Encampment Resolution Funding (ERF), the second largest award in the state, over a two-year period and will focus specifically on the 100+ person Castro Street vehicle encampment, using evidence-based clinical case management and intensive social service and housing navigation support. H3 provided technical support to the city to submit the application and an H3 CORE outreach team was written into the grant. - Family Challenge Grant: In March, the California Interagency Council on Homelessness (Cal ICH) released a Request for Applications (RFA) for a Family Homelessness Challenge Grant (FHC-1) to provide one-time grants and technical assistance to local jurisdictions and continuums of care to address and end family homelessness. Thirty million ($30 m) will be distributed across a minimum of two rounds of funding. The RFA for Round 1 is for funds totaling $15 million and awards will be determined through this competitive RFA process. Contra Costa has applied for this funding and is expected to get notification by the end of June. - Homeless, Housing and Assistance Program (HHAP3): HHAP Round 3 is a $1 billion grant through the California Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council that provides local jurisdictions, including federally recognized tribal governments, with flexible funding to continue efforts to end and prevent homelessness in their communities. H3 has gathered community input on the possible priorities for the $6.6 million ($3,434,907.05 going to the CoC and $3,205,913.24 going to the County) expected to be received after submitting the Homeless Action Plan required by the State. The plan includes measurable goals to be accomplished by June 30, 2024, was informed by local landscape analysis and has all- populations goal as well as equity focused goals. - Homekey 3: H3 will be applying for a Homekey 3 allocation this fall, for a 54-unit Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) project in San Pablo. Other jurisdictions within Contra Costa are eligible to apply individually for this funding as well. - Pet Assistance and Support (PAS): H3 has applied for a portion of the $10m PAS grant offered by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. The grant allows qualified homeless shelters to provide shelter, pet food and supplies, and basic veterinary services for pets owned by individuals experiencing homelessness, along with staffing and liability insurance related to providing those services. These services and accommodations reduce barriers, making shelter and services accessible to people who otherwise would not access these resources. Contra Costa Behavorial Health • Contra Costa Emergency Medical Services • Contra Costa Environmental Health • Contra Costa Health Plan • Contra Costa Hazardous Materials • Contra Costa Public Health • Contra Costa Regional Medical Center • Contra Costa Health Centers • Health, Housing and Homeless Services OTHER - The VISA Foundation: In May, Tipping Point announced that they would be launching a 3-year project focused on improving the lives of youth experiencing homelessness and housing instability in our region using funding from The VISA Foundation. This $16 million effort will provide support to local nonprofits serving youth experiencing homelessness and establish a Community of Practice to bring together service providers and other important stakeholders from Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties. FUTURE - Data Quality Monitoring Plan: The CoC is in the process of developing a Data Quality Monitoring Plan which would establish specific data quality benchmarks for the CoC and identify the responsibilities of all parties within the CoC regarding data quality. - Governance: In the coming months, the Council on Homelessness will be considering revisions to governance documents, including potentially changing and/or adding seats to the Council to increase the number of members with lived experience of homelessness. - Implement CES evaluation: The Plan for Accelerating Transformative Housing Innovations (PATH) Committee of the Council on Homelessness will focus on implementing finding from the Coordinated Entry System Evaluation in the coming year. - Implement Equity Recommendations: Within the next few months, the Council on Homelessness will designate an entity within the Council structure to shepherd implementation of equity recommendations. - Implement Program Models: H3 will begin implementation of approved program models beginning in July 2022. - HMIS Evaluation: An evaluation is underway to assess the configuration and use of the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS), with the overarching aim to ensure that HMIS workflows, data and reporting enable providers to be successful with new program models and performance-based contracting. Future communications from the Council on Homelessness and the CoC will continue to include: • Quarterly written reports from the Council on Homelessness (COH) to the Family and Human Services as a way to keep the Committee and Board of Supervisors updated on the activities and priorities of the Council and homeless continuum of care throughout the year. • An annual presentation from Health, Housing and Homeless Services about the activities and priorities of the homeless continuum of care. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): 1. Accept this report from the Health Services Department; and 2. Forward this report to the Board of Supervisors for acceptance Contra Costa Homeless System of Care Annual Update Christy Saxton, Director Health, Housing and Homeless Services Overview Adding and Improving Capacity Collaborations System Initiatives Funding Future Adding and Improving Capacity PROJECT ROOM KEY DELTA LANDING SHELTER IMPROVEMENTS VOUCHERS Collaborations HOLISTIC INTERVENTION PARTNERSHIP (HIP) HOMELESS WORKFORCE INTEGRATION NETWORK (H-WIN) SYSTEM PARTNER MAP System Initiatives Equity •Increased diversity of Council •Equity Assessment Homelessness Awareness Month •Toolkit, video, awards, presentation, panel discussion Regional Action Plan •PATH Innovations Committee implementing System Improvement •Program Models •Monitoring •CES Evaluation Point in Time Count •Geographic level data coming Funding Federal •HUD CoC •Transitional Living Program (TLP) State •Encampment Resolution (Richmond) •Family Challenge Grant •HHAP3 •HOME-ARP •Homekey •Pet Assistance and Support (PAS) Other •VISA Foundation Future Data Quality Monitoring Plan (DQMP) HMIS Evaluation Implementation •Coordinated Entry System •Equity •Program Models Governance For more information Christy Saxton, M.S. Director Health, Housing and Homeless Services (H3) Christy.saxton@cchealth.org 925-608-6701 RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the Health Care for the Homeless Annual Update report and presentation from the Health Services Department, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: Since 1990, the Health Care for the Homeless (HCH) Program has provided health care services to the homeless population in Contra Costa County through mobile clinics, stationary health centers, the Concord Medical Respite facility, street medical outreach clinics and the medication-assisted treatment program. The Family and Human Services Committee (FHS) received the attached Health Care for the Homeless report and presentation at its June 27, 2022 meeting and directed staff to forward it to the Board of Supervisors for its information. The delay in getting the report to the Board of Supervisors is due to administrative staff oversight after FHS approval. Committee staff are reviewing all FHS-approved items to be forwarded to the Board, and has improved its tracking tool to ensure delays do not occur in the future. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Enid Mendoza, (925) 655-2051 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 79 To:Board of Supervisors From:FAMILY & HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Healthcare for the Homeless Annual Report CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The annual report on the Health Care for the Homeless program will not be received as recommended by the FHS. ATTACHMENTS Health Care for the Homeless Annual Update Report Health Care for the Homeless Annual Update Presentation 1 CONTRA COSTA HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TO: Family and Human Services DATE: June 17, 2022 Committee Members Board of Supervisors FROM: Heather Cedermaz, MSN, FNP -c Medical Director, Health Care for the Homeless Mia Fairbanks MSN, RN, PHN Public Health Nurse Program Manager SUBJECT: Health Care for the Homeless Annual Update Recommendations 1. Accept this report from the Health Services Department; and 2. Forward this report to the Board of Supervisors for acceptance; and 3. Direct staff to continue to report on a n annual basis to the F amily and Human Services Committee regarding health status of the homeless population in Contra Costa County by the Health Care for the Homeless Program. Background Since 1990, the Health Care for the Homeless (HCH) Program has provided health care services to people experiencing homelessness (PEH) in Contra Costa County through regular mobile clinics, street medicine outreach, Federally Qualified Health C enter (FQHC) ambulatory clinics at the Concord shelter with a Medical Respite facility, as well as mobile and ambulatory dental clinics. The program is funded through a federal grant from the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) and successfully completed a site review in July 2021 with no findings. The program is governed by the Health Care for the Homeless Governing Board, which consists of homeless consumers and homeless service providers and advocates from throughout the County. The HCH program serves over 1,500 unique patients annually, completing over 6,000 appointments across all service sites. Health care services provided by the HCH team focus on primary prevention and harm reduction services with every encounter and includes assessment, triage and treatment of urgent medical and 2 mental health concerns and management of chronic conditions in partnership with primary care and Behavioral Health. Harm reduction services include substance use disorder assessment as well as point of care testing for infectious disease with treatment available same day and facilitation of treatment for conditions such as Hepatitis C. Referrals to establish with primary and specialty care, dental services, health education, behavioral health services, medication assisted treatment for opioid addiction, and outreach and enrollment services are available. A significant portion of PEH have chronic diseases, including congestive heart failure, hypertension, diabetes, and mental health/substance abuse disorders with life expectancy of PEH far below the average for housed individuals of the same demographic. HCH operates the 26 bed Phillip Dorn Medical Respite Center for homeless adults who are discharging from local hospitals and require medical stabilization services. Respite care refers to recuperative services for those homeless persons who may not meet medical criteria for hospitalization, but who are too sick or medically vulnerable to reside in an emergency shelter and cannot be returned to the streets. This program is a joint effort between Health Care for the Homeless and the Division of Health, Housing & Homeless Services . Additionally, HCH has received Substance Abuse Expansion funding to develop a Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) program since 2015. This program provides buprenorphine treatment and substance abuse case management services to homeless patients at five health center locations. The program has received national attention for its innovative approach to treating Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) using Buprenorphine combined with nursing and behavioral care management support. The program also includes Public Health Nurses and Mental Health Clinicians dedicated to managing OUD patients in homeless encampments with the street medicine team. CCHS has presented on these services at the National Health Care for the Homeless Conference and the National Street Medicine Conference in 2019. The HC H team is comprised of over 30 FTE of clinical and non-clinical staff, including medical, dental and behavioral providers, and enabling staff. In 2021, the HCH program hired two new leadership staff, Medical Director, Heather Cedermaz, and Nurse Program Ma nager, Mia Fairbanks. Heather joined the Contra Costa Public Health Clinic Services team in 2001 and has been dedicated to our mission of improving the health of the most vulnerable as a primary care provider, specialty services in breast health and oncolo gy and in population- based care with CommunityConnect and HCH. In addition to her role as a provider, Heather is the Nurse Practitioner Division Head. Mia Fairbanks came to us from Emergency Medical Services where she dedicated her time for 10 years as the coordinator of the Stroke and STEMI systems of care and previous 17 years working as a nurse in the emergency department. Most recently with CCHS Public Health, she has been managing the COVID vaccination and testing mobile team. 3 Since last year, HCH has added a health clinic at the new Delta Landing site in Pittsburg in collaboration with the Health, Housing and Homeless (H3) Division and Bay Area Community Services (BACS). As of March 2022, HCH ha s also begun providing mobile dental services at this s ite. Additionally, HCH teams continue to provide COVID-19 testing, surveillance, and vaccinations for Contra Costa homeless populations. As of June 2021, over 4,800 persons experiencing homelessness have been fully vaccinated and nearly 10,000 tests have been performed. The HCH program also provides onsite services for individuals housed at the county’s hotel isolation site for persons experiencing homelessness or otherwise unable to isolate or quarantine. In 2022 hotel placements peaked in January during the Omicron surge with an average daily occupancy rate of 60 individuals. While demand has decreased during the year the site continues to house an average of 20 individuals a day. This year, the program formally adopted a new three-year strategic plan, outlining program priorities and quality improvement focus areas. Plan goals and objectives are divided across key domains including 1) clinical services & quality improvement, 2) partnerships & communications, 3) planning & oversight, and 4) program finances & staffing. Clinical focus areas align with national quality metrics reported annually to HRSA. In 2021 HCH reported improvements in most clinical measures, signaling a return to pre -pandemic rates following 2020 declines. Promising improvements included a 15% increase in colorectal cancer screening, 6% increase in breast cancer screening, and 20% increase in depression screening with documentation of a follow up plan for individuals screening positive. Additional strategic plan priorities include continued expansion of direct Medication Assisted Treatment services, developing new workflows to support the aging homeless population, and increasing awareness, transparency, and access to program services through collaborations with stakeholder groups. Health Care for the Homeless 6/27/2022 Heather Cedermaz, MSN, FNP-C Medical Director, Health Care for the Homeless Maria Fairbanks, MSN, RN, PHN, Program Manager Health Care for the Homeless 1 Agenda 1.HCH Program Overview 2.Mission Statement 3.Operations 4.Strategic Plan and Metrics 5.Collaborations and Access to Services 2 3 Program Overview 4 Mission Statement Contra Costa County Health Services,Health Care for the Homeless program’s mission is to improve the health of the homeless population in Contra Costa County by increasing access to health care and by providing a team-oriented approach to health care that focuses on harm reduction and integration of mental health and medical services. Population Based Care focused on meeting clients where they are to build trust and support and collaborate with them and their health home to optimize wellness. 5 Clinic Operations All Project Room Key Hotel HCH clinics have closed. Collaborating with partners on other clinic opportunities. Delta Landing –Pittsburg Largest site –157 rooms •PUI rooms •M-F –RN/CHW •RN/Provider/Mental Health/Dental Concord Shelter •Respite •RN-Provider M-F •Medical management support M-F for most vulnerable patients •​Dental •RN/Provider –Monday and Wednesday Brookside Shelter –North Richmond •M/W –4 hour clinics •RN/Provider/Mental Health •Lower census Mobile Clinics Monday-8-4: BARM Tuesday –8-12: Bay Point -JM Thursday-1-4: Fulton Ship Yard -JM Friday-8-12: Martinez Marina –JM Mobile Outreach Teams •40 hours a week –MH/RN •RN/Provider-CHW-MH clinician visit encampments throughout the county. •Collaborations -Local Police Department, CORE, Communicable Disease program Prenatal •HEPPAC Strategic Plan •Strategic Plan includes enhancing transparency and collaboration with all stakeholders •Improve outcomes on all HRSA Clinical Measures •Focus on Harm Reduction: Medically Assisted Treatment, Point of Care Testing, Treatment for infectious Disease •Focus on Vulnerable Senior Population who become homeless as older adults and have diminished capacity •Continue support for congregate settings to normalize response and management of COVID 19. Vaccination, testing and isolation 6 HRSA Clinical Measures Priority Area: Improve outcomes on all HRSA Clinical Measures •On track to return to pre-pandemic rates following 2020 declines •15% increase in Colorectal Cancer Screening •6% increase in Breast Cancer Screening •20% increase in Depression Screening and Follow Up Care 7 Harm Reduction & Medication Assisted Treatment Priority Area: Increase availability for addiction treatment in all HCH Clinics •Reduce barriers to treatment and recovery support •100% of HCH Providers Waivered to prescribed Buprenorphine •87% of HCH patients with an opioid use disorder were offered MAT services during the year •81% received at least 1 MAT prescription during the year 8 Aging Homeless Adults •Priority Area: Focus on Vulnerable Senior Population who become homeless as older adults and have diminished capacity •Implement new strategic plan initiatives to serve the aging homeless •26% Increase in patients age 65+ seen by HCH in the last year •New workflows to identify & serve patients with decreased cognitive capacity •Implement monthly high acuity case rounds for patients with decreased capacity in collaboration with H3 9 COVID-19 Response •Priority Area: Continued Support for COVID-19 Response •Direct Service Provider for COVID-19 Testing, Vaccination, & Safe Isolation •Nearly 10,000 tests administered to Contra Costa homeless •Over 4,800 persons experiencing homeless fully vaccinated •PUI hotel continuing to house an average of 20 patients a day in 2022 10 How to Reach Us and Learn More •https://cchealth.org/healthcare-for-homeless/ •Warm Line: 925-608-5276—Community Health Worker M-F: 8-4 •General services questions, appointment assistance for HCH requiring timely response •Health Care for the Homeless Main Number –925-608-5300 •hch@cchealth.org general questions, less urgent, client coordination questions •211—Access to CORE—single entry for housing RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the 2022 Report on Family Justice Centers and Commercially Sexually Exploited Children report and presentation, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: On January 6, 2015, the Board approved referring oversight to the Family and Human Services Committee (FHS) on the Family Justice Centers and Commercially Sexually Exploited Children initiatives. This became FHS Referral No. 111. On June 8, 2015, November 14, 2016, February 20, 2018, February 25, 2019, July 27, 2020, and June 28, 2021, FHS received and approved annual reports from the Employment and Human Services Department on the Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence Initiative, Human Trafficking, Commercially Sexually Exploited Children, and the Family Justice Centers. FHS received the attached annual update on June 27, 2022 and directed staff to forward it to the Board of Supervisors for its information. The delay getting the report to the Board of Supervisors is due to administrative staff oversight after FHS approval. Committee staff are reviewing all FHS approved items to be forwarded to the Board, and has improved its tracking tool to ensure delays do not occur in the future. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Enid Mendoza, (925) 655-2051 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 80 To:Board of Supervisors From:FAMILY & HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Family Justice Centers and Commercially Sexually Exploited Children Annual Update CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The report will not be received. CLERK'S ADDENDUM Speakers: Caller 6770; No name given. ATTACHMENTS 2022 Family Justice Centers and Commercially Sexually Exploited Children Presentation 2022 Family Justice Centers and Commercially Sexually Exploited Children Report 2022 Family Justice Center and Commercially Sexually Exploited Children (CSEC) Services Team Report CONTRA COSTA COUNTY EMPLOYMENT & HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT (EHSD) CONTRA COSTA FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER (FJC) REPORT TO THE FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE | JUNE 21, 2022 PRESENTED BY : KIMBERLY BAKER, DIVISION MANAGER, EMPLOYMENT AND HUMAN SERVICES CSEC UNIT NATALIE OLEAS, CENTRAL CENTER DIRECTOR, FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER Family Justice Center Overview 2 The Family Justice Center (the Center) is a one-stop center for families affected by domestic violence, sexual assault, elder abuse, child abuse, and human trafficking. •Created in 2011 as a project of the Alliance to End Abuse and gained nonprofit status in 2015 •Coordinates with 65 on-site partners so clients can get safer sooner •The Alliance and other County departments remain essential partners, among many Since 2015, the Center served a total of 22,174 individuals that experienced interpersonal violence. The number of clients grow each year along with the demand/need for resources. Addressing Mental Health During the Pandemic 3 In 2021, the Center remained open to the public during the COVID- 19 pandemic and enhanced mental health services by offering several different counseling options for clients of any age : •Started the Trauma Recovery Center in July 2021, which provides free counseling to all victims of violent crime •Collaborated with emergency room doctors through Vituity Healthcare to pilot the TeleCare telehealth urgent care for victims of interpersonal violence so that victims can get care from a safe and confidential place in place •Partnered with Community Financial Resources to help underbanked individuals open reloadable debit card and offered incentives towards savings goals •Expanded its restraining order assistance by having the attorneys in its Lawyers for Family Justice program offer 18 additional hours of restraining order assistance per week Introducing New FJC East Center Director 115 Introducing Shannon Starzyk as the new FJC East Center Director Before joining the Family Justice Center, Shannon worked as the Coordinator of Administrative Services for a performing arts charter school. Shannon previously served as faculty and a guest lecturer for Carrington College, St. Mary’s College, Los Medanos College, and Montana State University. Shannon has a passion for and commitment to the Family Justice Center’s mission, vision, and belief that all survivors of interpersonal violence can achieve justice, healing, and hope through education, collaborative partnerships with the community, policy development and implementation, and advocacy. Shannon earned an MSW from the University of California, Los Angeles and a Bachelor of Arts degree in Psychology from San Jose State University. Shannon is currently pursuing a PsyD in Clinical Psychology and has a strong interest in conducting research that focuses on violence, epigenetics, generational trauma, and healing. CSEC Services Team Overview 8 The Children and Family Services (CFS) Commercially Sexually Exploited Children (CSEC) Services Team follows the federal and state guidelines by outlining trauma-informed protocols to support the commercially sexually exploited (CSE) population. The program's mission is to eliminate the exploitation of children and build a system of care that addresses the needs of at-risk youth and survivors across Child Welfare, Probation, and the Contra Costa community. System of Care Linkages 6 Monthly meeting to discuss high-risk CSEC cases; those identified are nominated for case discussion at Human Trafficking Multi-Disciplinary Team Meeting Children and Family Services (CFS) CSEC team Community Violence Solutions (CVS) County Probation Department Alliance to End Abuse The Alliance participates or coordinates: 1.HT MDT 2.DV MDT 3.Strangulation Task Force 4.Death review 5.High Danger DV Task Force 6.Alternatives to DV Supervision Search and Recovery Program 3 Over the recent years, the CSEC/Y program identified that a significant number of youth were missing from care, which puts them at an even higher risk of abuse, neglect, and exploitation. As a result, in April 2022, CFS began partnering with Love Never Fails (LNF)to operate a "Search and Recovery"Program for exploited youth missing from care in Contra Costa County. Love Never Fails staff are fueled with love and equipped with a Recovery Investigator and Clinical Case Manager, each of whom provides recovery case management and community outreach and offers support to Children and Family Services as we make concerted efforts to locate and serve youth who go missing from care. Key CSEC Data Points 117 Age Children who are at-risk or are survivors of human trafficking vary in age. In Contra Costa, the largest groups of children/youth with CSE involvement are between ages 13 and 18, with a significant increase in CSE involvement at age 16. Gender Contra Costa data shows there are more females identified as CSEC/Y than males. This has historically been the case in Contra Costa, and is also reflective throughout the state as a whole and the nation; males continue to be underreported. Ethnicity Contra Costa data indicates that the majority of youth with CSE involvement are African American. There are also a significant number of youth with Central American heritage in Contra Costa who have CSE involvement. At -Risk Youth and Survivors The number of children/youth identified as being CSE at-risk continues to grow in Contra Costa. This trend is happening all over the county, as indicated on the chart that breaks down the number of CSE youth in the child welfare system as identified by location and program. Questions? 9 1 M E M O R A N D U M Marla Stuart, Director 40 Douglas Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 • (925) 313-1500 • Fax (925) 313-1575 • www.ehsd.org To: Family and Human Services Committee Members Date: June 9, 2022 Monica Nino, County Administrator From: Marla Stuart, Director, Employment and Human Services Tamina Alon, Interim Assistant Director, Policy & Planning and Alliance to End Abuse Subject: 2022 Report on Family Justice Centers and Commercially Sexually Exploited Children (Presented by Kimberly Baker, CSEC Team and Natalie Oleas, Family Justice Center) RECOMMENDATION ACCEPT this report from the Family Justice Center (FJC) and the Children and Family Services (CFS) Bureau’s Commercially Sexually Exploited Children (CSEC) Services Team of Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD), which provides updates on programming and service provision in Contra Costa County over the course of the last year. FAMILY JUSTICE CENTERS The Contra Costa Family Justice Alliance, a 501c3 nonprofit, operates three Family Justice Centers in Antioch, Concord, and Richmond. The Family Justice Center (the Center) is a one-stop center for families affected by domestic violence, sexual assault, elder abuse, child abuse, and human trafficking. The Family Justice Center coordinates with 65 on-site partners so clients can get safer sooner. The Family Justice Center was created in 2011 as a project of the Alliance to End Abuse (The Alliance) and gained its nonprofit status in 2015. The Alliance continues to support the development of the Center, and County departments remain essential partners among many, supporting residents who are accessing the centers. In 2021, the Family Justice Centers provided services to 5,254 individuals who experienced interpersonal violence (2,210 clients from Central Center, 1,982 clients from West Center and 1,062 from East Center). This was an 18% increase in the number of clients from 2020. Those services impacted an additional 4,029 children living with these clients. Since 2015, the need for services at the Center has increased, and the number of clients served has increased from 1,217 families in 2015 to 5,254 families in 2021. 2 Number of Clients served at Contra Costa Family Justice Centers, 2015 - 2021 The Family Justice Center regularly evaluates the top needs of clients and seeks to fill service gaps through enhanced and innovative programming. In 2021, the Family Justice Center remained open to the public during the COVID-19 pandemic for in person and virtual/phone services. During the pandemic, the Center formed new partners and collaborated on innovative projects to deliver safe and impactful programs to victims of interpersonal violence. Recognizing that mental health was an issue due to COVID social distancing recommendations, the Center enhanced its mental health services by offering several different counseling options for clients of any age. This included starting the Trauma Recovery Center in July 2021, which provides free counseling to all victims of violent crime. The Center collaborated with emergency room doctors through Vituity Healthcare to pilot the TeleCare telehealth urgent care for victims of interpersonal violence so that victims can get care from a safe and confidential place. To respond to survivors that do not have their own bank accounts, the Center partnered with Community Financial Resources to provide underbanked individuals with open reloadable debit cards and offered incentives towards their savings goals. The Center also expanded its restraining order assistance by having attorneys in its Lawyers for Family Justice Program offer 18 additional hours of restraining order assistance per week. 3 4 Since 2015, domestic violence has been the most prevalent type of interpersonal violence issue addressed at the Family Justice Centers in Contra Costa County. To improve identification of sexual assault, child abuse, elder abuse, stalking, and human trafficking, the Center, along with the Alliance to End Abuse, are improving outreach efforts and best practices for identifying those cases. Through the Elder Abuse Prevention Project, awareness campaigns and coordinated resources are being implemented to increase awareness of elder abuse. Through the Human Trafficking Coalition, law enforcement agencies and service providers are collaborating to create streamlined community awareness campaigns and focused efforts to provide information to victims of sexual and labor trafficking. 5 COMMERCIALLY SEXUALLY EXPLOITED CHILDREN (CSEC) SERVICES TEAM The Children and Family Services (CFS) Commercially Sexually Exploited Children (CSEC) Services Team follows the federal and state guidelines by outlining trauma-informed protocols to support the commercially sexually exploited (CSE) population. The program's mission is to eliminate the exploitation of children and build a system of care that addresses the needs of at-risk youth and survivors across Child Welfare, Probation, and the Contra Costa community. The CFS CSEC Services Team works by following the mandate of ensuring that identification, documentation, and services are provided for all CSE youth. The Team meets monthly to review any new legal mandates or updates from the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) and discuss program needs and resources to increase CSE awareness, identification, and referrals for services. Since the program's inception in 2015, there have been innovative additions to create a safety net for the youth we serve. One of the supporting components of the program is the countywide Interagency Steering Committee. The Interagency Steering Committee provides ongoing oversight and leadership to ensure all Contra Costa County departments and community service providers collaborate to identify and serve at-risk youth or survivors of commercial sexual exploitation. Additionally, the Interagency Protocol for Serving Commercially Sexually Exploited Children in Contra Costa County was revised last year to include the Contra Costa County Office of Education and the County Sheriff's Department. Each month, the CFS CSEC Services team and Juvenile Probation Department co-facilitate this meeting, where the Family Justice Center, Community Violence Solutions, and the Alliance to End Abuse meet to discuss high-risk CSEC cases to identify and assess system-involved youth who have lived experience or are at risk of commercial sexual exploitation. Those identified are nominated for case discussion at the Human Trafficking Multidisciplinary Team (HT MDT) case review for further guidance by HT MDT members such as health professionals, social workers, advocates, and law enforcement. Over the recent years, the CSEC/Y program identified that a significant number of youth were missing from care, which puts them at an even higher risk of abuse, neglect, and exploitation. As a result, in April 2022, CFS began a pilot program in partnership with Love Never Fails (LNF) to operate a "Search and Recovery" Program for exploited youth missing from care in Contra Costa County. Love Never Fails staff are fueled with love and equipped with a Recovery Investigator and Clinical Case Manager, each of whom provides recovery case management and community outreach and offers support to Children and Family Services as we make concerted efforts to locate and serve youth who go missing from care. There continues to be ongoing training for social workers and community members to increase the identification of CSE youth. The continual collaborative efforts have led to the training of community partners to screen all youth ages ten and older with the Commercial Sexual Exploitation Identification Tool (CSE-IT). CFS has trained many professionals, resource caregivers, community partners, and service providers on a range of topics from Harm Reduction, CSEC Red Flags, and the intersection of CSEC and Child Labor Trafficking. Contra Costa's Juvenile Probation and Public Health Departments also utilize this screening tool. 6 CSEC/Y in Contra Costa County Facts: • Children who are at-risk or are survivors of human trafficking vary in age. In Contra Costa, the largest groups of children/youth with CSE involvement are between ages 13 and 18, with a significant increase in CSE involvement at age 16. • There are more females identified as CSEC/Y than males. This has historically been the case in Contra Costa, and is also reflective throughout the state as a whole and the nation. Males continue to be underreported. • The majority of youth with CSE involvement are African American. There are also a significant number of youth with Central American heritage in Contra Costa who have CSE involvement. • The number of children/youth identified as being CSE at-risk continues to grow in Contra Costa. ADDITIONAL RESOURCES • Contra Costa County Family Justice Centers • CSEC (Commercially Sexually Exploited Children) | EHSD • Contra Costa Alliance to End Abuse RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2022/325 adopting the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Adopted Budget as finally determined, including: Final changes to close out the 2021-2022 County Budget, including changes to revenues, appropriations, and obligated fund balances; and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller to make the necessary changes in the financial accounting system, as reflected in Attachment A; a. Final changes to the 2022-2023 County Budget, including changes to appropriations, revenues, and obligated fund balances; and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator and Auditor-Controller to make technical adjustments to the budgets pursuant to Attachment B (County - Schedule A, B, and C); b. Final changes to close out the 2021/2022 Special Districts Budget, including changes to revenues, appropriations, and obligated fund balances; and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller to make the necessary changes in the financial accounting system, as reflected in Attachment C; and c. Final changes to the 2022-2023 Special Districts Budget, including changes to appropriations, revenues, and obligated fund balances; and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator and Auditor-Controller to make technical adjustments to the budgets pursuant to Attachment D (Special Districts - Schedule A, B, and C). d. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/20/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Adam Nguyen, County Finance Director (925) 655-2048 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 20, 2022 , County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Antonia Welty, Deputy cc: C. 81 To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Date:September 20, 2022 Contra Costa County Subject:Resolution No. 2022/325 Adoption of the FY22-23 Budget As Finally Determined FISCAL IMPACT: As described in the background information below, this action adjusts FY 2021-2022 appropriations and revenues to balance budgeted figures to actual experience; and for FY22-23, includes fund balances, reserves, designations and all estimated revenue and appropriation line item changes to correspond to the latest information. BACKGROUND: On April 12, 2022, the Board of Supervisors adopted the State Controller's Office Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Recommended Budget Schedules for Countywide Funds and Special Districts, conducted public hearings on County and Special District budgets, and directed the County Administrator to prepare for Board adoption the FY22-23 County and Special District Budgets, as modified, to incorporate any changes directed by the Board during the public hearings. On May 10, 2022, the Board of Supervisors requested that the Auditor-Controller make adjustments to the FY21-22 appropriations and revenues by reallocating and balancing budgeted and actual expenditures and revenues as needed for various budget units and special districts, subject to Board approval in September. This request is pursuant to state law that requires each budget unit and expenditure object level within those units not exceed appropriations. Each year, this requirement generates a substantial number of adjustments to balance each budget unit and object. Attachments A and C (County and Special Districts respectively) contain the necessary appropriation adjustments to close out the FY21-22 Budget. Attachments Aa and Ca (County and Special Districts respectively) are provided as companion documents in a format more readable and with more detail for the lay person. Due to the volume of adjustments required and as allowable by the Budget Act (with the exception of fixed asset accounts ) adjustments are made to balance by major object (i.e. 1000, 2000, etc.); therefore, the over/under amounts do not always tie to the specific appropriation account. Also on May 10, 2022, the Board of Supervisors authorized the Auditor-Controller to make technical adjustments to the FY22-23 County and Special District Budgets when actual amounts were known. This action is pursuant to state law that requires the Board of Supervisors adopt a budget which includes obligated fund balances and all estimated revenue and appropriation line-item changes to the proposed Budget no later than October 2 of each year. Attachments B and D (County and Special Districts respectively) include changes to revenues, appropriations, and obligated fund balances in the FY22-23 Budget to correspond with the latest fiscal and legal information Schedule C begins with the final year carryforwards and appropriations adjustments as described above. Note that the General Fund budget is required to be balanced, therefore there is not a recommended budget fund balance nor a final budget fund balance. Non-general funds can carry appropriated fund balance and therefore those funds may include recommended budget fund balance and final budget fund balance. Schedule B begins with the total fund balance calculated by the Auditor for each fund. From that total, encumbrances, the total from Schedule C, and all the fund balance totals from Schedule A are subtracted. Encumbrances are used to control expenditure commitments and enhance cash management. The assignment to general fund reserve is the residual net resources excess of non-spendable, restricted, and committed fund balance over total fund balance. Note that the term fund balance available is misleading as the majority of these funds are restricted. Schedule A details the obligated fund balances. The obligated amounts increase or decrease only by Board adoption or adopted Board policy. The Schedule begins with the end of year totals in each fund balance category: Non-spendable, inherently non-spendable due to their form; Restricted, externally enforceable limitations of use imposed by creditors, laws or enabling legislation; Committed, self-imposed limitations set in place prior to the end of the year by the Board of Supervisors; Assigned, limitation resulting from intended use by the Board of Supervisors; and Unassigned, which is the residual net resources excess of non-spendable, restricted, and committed fund balance over total fund balance. The final figures in Schedule A are updated per previous actions of the Board. For the General Fund: The reduction in the EBRCS (East Bay Regional Communication System) balance represents the expenses incurred in FY21-22; $22.78M is restricted for Medicare Part D; $6M is restricted for the Public Liability Trust Fund; $3.3M is restricted for the CCTV’s Public, Educational, and Governmental Fund; $2M is assigned for a Workday procurement module; $2.2 million is assigned for cyber security; The $19.56M increase to the assignment for capital reserve is directed by the General Fund Reserve Policy (as described in the Recommended Budget on page 524); $18.77M is assigned for the Measure X reserve; and No residual was assigned to the general fund designated reserve. Included in these annual materials are several items of note, specifically Schedule C in Attachment B totals $135.17M. Of this amount, $71,684,114 are non-General funds and restricted. The balance of $63,483,892 are for General Fund appropriation carryforwards and adjustments that fall into five general categories as detailed below: Measure X committed funds total $33.9M or 53.5% of the total carryforwards; Restricted funds total $19.1M or 30.2%; Information technology costs total $6.8M or 10.7%; Capital project costs total $2.97M or 4.7%; And $624k are for program related costs, such as $321k for indigent defense for the Public Defender, and $235k for Geographic Information Systems, and other miscellaneous appropriations. Attachment B (Schedule B) includes encumbrances of $121.4M, of which $119.96M is in the General Fund. Encumbrances reflect the outstanding contractual obligations for which goods and services have not been received and are set up to reserve portions of applicable appropriations. Encumbrances still open at year end are not accounted for as expenditures or liabilities, but as a constraint imposed on fund balance. Timing of the phases of the compilation, publication, presentation, and adoption of the County budgets is an important topic of discussion. All of the individual phases of the County budget process have significant timing restrictions and adhere to the County Budget Act, as prescribed in Government Code 29000-29144. The County of Contra Costa operates on a modified accrual basis. Modified accrual accounting combines accrual basis accounting with cash basis accounting. Revenues are recognized when they become available and measurable and, with few exceptions, records expenditures when liabilities are incurred. For practical purposes this means that the final budget for June 30 includes a sixty-day adjustment period, leaving very little time to prepare the State Schedules for review and adoption. Government Code section 29088 states that the budget shall be adopted by Resolution no later than October 2. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Delay in Final Budget Adoption. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2022/325 Attachment A - County Appropriation Adjustments Attachment Aa - Details of County Appropriation Adjustments Attachment B - County Schedules A, B, and C Attachment C - Special District Appropriation Adjustments Attachment Ca - Details of Special District Appropriation Adjustments Attachment D - Special Districts Schedules A, B, and C MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Atch A Signed Atch C Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 1 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 2 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 3 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 4 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 5 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 6 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 7 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 8 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 9 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 10 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 11 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 12 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 13 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 14 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 15 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 16 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 17 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 18 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 19 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 20 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 21 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 22 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 23 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 24 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 25 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 26 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 27 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 28 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 29 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 30 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 31 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 32 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 33 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 34 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 35 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 36 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 37 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 38 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 39 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 40 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 41 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 42 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 43 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 44 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 45 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 46 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 47 of 48 Attachment A - County Appropriation AdjustmentsPage 48 of 48 AgencyFundDepartmentOrgAccountDecreaseIncreaseIncreaseDecrease04 100300 0005General Purpose Revenue0005 9011 PROP TAX-SUPPLEMENTAL $4,876,850.0001100300 0001 Department of Supervisors1130 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $142,000.0001 100300 0001 Department of Supervisors1130 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV$142,000.0001 100300 0036 Merit Board0036 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP 7,000 01 100300 0036 Merit Board0036 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES 7,000 01 115800 0478 No Rich Wst& Rvcy Mitigation Fee 0478 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV 6,000 01 115800 0478 No Rich Wst& Rvcy Mitigation Fee 0478 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 6,000 02 100300 0145 Employee/Retiree Benefits1695 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS $5,000.0002 100300 0145 Employee/Retiree Benefits1695 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES5,000 02 100300 0145 Employee/Retiree Benefits1696 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP 500,000 02 100300 0145 Employee/Retiree Benefits1696 1044 RETIREMENT EXPENSE 335,000 02 100300 0145 Employee/Retiree Benefits1696 4951 OFFICE EQUIP & FURNITURE $165,000.0002 100300 0150 Risk Management1565 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS $3,655,000.0002 100300 0150 Risk Management1566 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES$34,056,000.0002 100300 0150 Risk Management1566 9569 OTHER FEDERAL AID $37,711,000.0003 100300 0002 Clerk of the Board0002 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 24,200 03 100300 0002 Clerk of the Board0002 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES 3,500 03 100300 0002 Clerk of the Board0002 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $28,750.0003 100300 0002 Clerk of the Board0002 9851 INTERFUND REV - GOV/GOV 1,050 03 100300 0003 County Administrator1200 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $600,000.0003 100300 0060 Telecommunications4280 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $339,000.0003 100300 0060 Telecommunications4280 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $996,000.0003 100300 0060 Telecommunications4280 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 256,000 03 100300 0060 Telecommunications4280 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES1,591,000 03 100300 0147 Information Technology1050 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $2,500,000.0003 100300 0147 Information Technology1050 3505 RETIRE OTH LONG TERM DEBT 446,000 03 100300 0147 Information Technology1050 4951 OFFICE EQUIP & FURNITURE $1,040,000.0003 100300 0147 Information Technology1050 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $3,502,000.0003 100300 0147 Information Technology1050 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES484,000 03 100300 0147 Information Technology1050 9875 DATA PROCESSING SERVICES 568,850 11 100300 0080 Minor Building Improvements0080 2284 REQUESTED MAINTENANCE $28,000.0011 100300 0080 Minor Building Improvements0080 2330 OTHER GEN SVCS CHARGES $101,757.0011 100300 0080 Minor Building Improvements0080 9956 TRANSFERS - GOV/GOV 40,000 11 100300 0080 Minor Building Improvements0080 9969 INDEMNIFYING PROCEEDS 132,000 11 100300 0085 Facilities Lifecycle Improvement4110 4470 UNDESIGNATED CAP PROJECTS 436,500 11 100300 0085 Facilities Lifecycle Improvement4110 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES113,500 11 100300 0085 Facilities Lifecycle Improvement4110 4359 010-FLIP MOD C PLUMBING 550,000 11 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4401 4329 CNTY CPTL PLN UNDSG 21-22 600,000 11 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4402 4265 VARIOUS IMPROVEMNTS 3,200 11 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4405 4356 001-651 PINE DEMO $4,091,757.0011 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4419 4322 387-REPLACE PLUMBING 6,730 11 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4419 4380 036-CRISIS HUB 1,408 11 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4421 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES 7,638 11 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4421 4316 502-CSB KITCHEN CONSTRCTN $7,639.0011 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4423 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES 8,138 11 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4433 4113 102-SALE PH LIBRY PROPRTY $153,201.0015 100300 0015 Treasurer-Tax Collector0015 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $55,000.0015 100300 0015 Treasurer-Tax Collector0015 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP 55,000 16 100300 0016 Assessor1600 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 489,000 16 100300 0016 Assessor1600 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP 469,000 16 100300 0016 Assessor1600 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES20,000 16 100300 0019 Assessment Litigation Services 0019 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS $368,000.0017 100300 0030 County Counsel1700 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $340,000.00Appropriation/ExpenditureRevenue ModificationsDetails for Attachment C (County Appropriation Adjustments)Modifications (TC 27)(TC 24)Attachment Aa - Details of County Appropriation Adjustments1 of 6 AgencyFundDepartmentOrgAccountDecreaseIncreaseIncreaseDecreaseAppropriation/ExpenditureRevenue ModificationsDetails for Attachment C (County Appropriation Adjustments)Modifications (TC 27)(TC 24)17 100300 0030 County Counsel1700 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES 340,000 19 100300 0501 EHSD Administration Services 5101 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS 10,397,000 19 100300 0501 EHSD Administration Services 5101 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV $10,000.0019 100300 0501 EHSD Administration Services 5101 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES 4,150,000 19 100300 0502 EHSD Children & Family Svcs 5220 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES $1,900,000.0019 100300 0502 EHSD Children & Family Svcs 5251 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 1,900,000 19 100300 0503 EHSD-Adult & Aging Services 5315 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 1,600,000 19 100300 0503 EHSD-Adult & Aging Services 5273 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $685,000.0019 100300 0503 EHSD-Adult & Aging Services 5273 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 4,960,000 19 100300 0503 EHSD-Adult & Aging Services 5315 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES $1,750,000.0019 100300 0504 EHSD-Workforce Services5452 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 2,055,000 19 100300 0504 EHSD-Workforce Services5452 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV $1,800,000.0019 100300 0504 EHSD-Workforce Services5452 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV $255,000.0019 100300 0581 Zero Tolerance Domestic Viol Init5561 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $235,000.0019 100300 0581 Zero Tolerance Domestic Viol Init5561 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 34,000 19 100300 0581 Zero Tolerance Domestic Viol Init5561 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV201,000 19 100300 0583 EHSD Wfrc Investment Bd5608 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP 337,000 19 100300 0583 EHSD Wfrc Investment Bd5674 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 105,000 19 115500 0508 IHSS Public Authority Fund0508 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 127,000 19 115500 0508 IHSS Public Authority Fund0508 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $45,000.0019 115500 0508 IHSS Public Authority Fund0508 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV $82,000.0020 100300 0202 Trial Court Programs2100 3580 CONTRIB TO OTHER AGENCIES 210,000 20 100300 0202 Trial Court Programs2123 2313 OUTSIDE ATTORNEY FEES 200,000 20 100300 0202 Trial Court Programs2122 1013 TEMPORARY SALARIES $10,000.0022 112600 0246 Dispute Resolution Program 0246 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV $3,000.0022 112600 0246 Dispute Resolution Program 0246 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS $3,450.0022 112600 0246 Dispute Resolution Program 0246 8981 FUND BALANCE AVAILABLE 450 24 100300 0043 Elections2353 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $200,000.0024 100300 0043 Elections2353 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $200,000.0024 100300 0355 Recorder0355 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 5,000 24 100300 0355 Recorder0355 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES5,000 25 100300 0255 Sheriff2500 4948 MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT 745,000 25 100300 0255 Sheriff2500 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 923,000 25 100300 0255 Sheriff2500 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $328,000.0025 100300 0255 Sheriff2500 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 276,000 25 100300 0255 Sheriff2500 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV905,000 25 100300 0255 Sheriff2500 9446 ST AID-PUBLIC SAFETY SVCS 1,687,000 25 100300 0277 Sheriff Contract Svcs2591 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 1,000 25 100300 0277 Sheriff Contract Svcs2591 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV $1,000.0025 100300 0300 Sheriff Detention2578 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $4,753,000.0025 100300 0300 Sheriff Detention2578 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS 4,600,000 25 100300 0359 Coroner0359 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $90,000.0025 100300 0359 Coroner0359 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS $242,000.0025 100300 0359 Coroner0359 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 1,000 25 100300 0362 Emergency Services Division 3620 9340 ST AID FOR CIVIL DEFENSE 455,000 25 100300 0362 Emergency Services Division 3620 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 235,000 25 100300 0362 Emergency Services Division 3620 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 95,000 25 100300 0362 Emergency Services Division 3620 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP 640,000 25 100300 0362 Emergency Services Division 3620 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV $145,000.0025 114300 0262 SLESF-Jail Constr0262 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV$10,000.0025 114300 0263 SLESF-Front Line Enf-Co0263 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV10,000 25 136000 0274 AB 8790270 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV 500,000 25 136000 0274 AB 8790270 9375 ST AID FOR DISASTER-OTHER 500,000 Attachment Aa - Details of County Appropriation Adjustments2 of 6 AgencyFundDepartmentOrgAccountDecreaseIncreaseIncreaseDecreaseAppropriation/ExpenditureRevenue ModificationsDetails for Attachment C (County Appropriation Adjustments)Modifications (TC 27)(TC 24)30 100300 0308 Probation Programs3050 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 366,000 30 100300 0308 Probation Programs3050 4955 RADIO & COMMUNICATN EQUIP $169,000.0030 100300 0308 Probation Programs3050 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV 197,000 30 100300 0309 Probation Facilities3120 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $10,000.0030 100300 0309 Probation Facilities3120 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 10,000 30 114900 0313 Youth Fund0313 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP 60,000 30 114900 0313 Youth Fund0313 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 60,000 36 100300 0366 Animal Services3331 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 365,000 36 100300 0366 Animal Services3331 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS $365,000.0038 100300 0591 Econ Dev/Sustainability0591 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS 120,000 38 100300 0591 Econ Dev/Sustainability0591 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV $120,000.0038 100300 0592 HUD Block Grant 1590 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS $170,000.0038 100300 0592 HUD Block Grant 1590 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV 170,000 38 100300 0593 HUD Emergency Solutions Grnt1593 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS 155,000 38 100300 0593 HUD Emergency Solutions Grnt1593 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV $155,000.0038 100300 0594 Home Investment Prtnshp Prog 1598 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS $2,000.0038 100300 0594 Home Investment Prtnshp Prog 1598 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV $2,000.0038 112000 0280 Conservation & Development2636 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP 3,271,000 38 112000 0280 Conservation & Development2636 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES 3,250,000 38 112000 0285 Energy Efficiency Programs0285 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 21,000 38 134900 0597 ARRA HUD Bldg Insp NPP 0597 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS $30,000.0038 134900 0597 ARRA HUD Bldg Insp NPP 0597 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV $30,000.0040 113400 0249 Child Support Services1780 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $562,000.0040 113400 0249 Child Support Services1780 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $508,000.0040 113400 0249 Child Support Services1780 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV $49,000.0040 113400 0249 Child Support Services1780 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV 5,000 42 100300 0242 District Attorney2820 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $30,000.0042 100300 0242 District Attorney2820 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES $30,000.0042 112400 0247 DA Consumer Protection 0247 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV $89,300.0042 112400 0247 DA Consumer Protection 0247 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS $89,000.0042 112400 0247 DA Consumer Protection 0247 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 300 43 100300 0243 Public Defender2909 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 16,300 43 100300 0243 Public Defender2909 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS 16,000 43 100300 0243 Public Defender2909 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 100 43 100300 0243 Public Defender2909 4951 OFFICE EQUIP & FURNITURE $200.0044 115300 0296 Support Services2770 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV $15,600,000.0044 115300 0296 Support Services2770 8981 FUND BALANCE AVAILABLE 15,600,000 65 100300 0020 Purchasing0020 2251 COMPUTER SOFTWARE COST 35,000 65 100300 0020 Purchasing0020 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS 25,000 65 100300 0020 Purchasing0020 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $53,000.0065 100300 0020 Purchasing0020 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 8,500 65 100300 0020 Purchasing0020 1043 RET EXP-PRE 1997 RETIREES$2,000.0065 100300 0020 Purchasing0020 1044 RETIREMENT EXPENSE 2,500 65 100300 0020 Purchasing0020 1060 EMPLOYEE GROUP INSURANCE $8,000.0065 100300 0020 Purchasing0020 9975 MISC NON-TAXABLE REVENUE 11,500 65 100300 0077 General Co Bldg Occupancy Cost4301 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV $157,000.0065 100300 0077 General Co Bldg Occupancy Cost4301 2262 BLDG OCCUPANCY COSTS$465,000.0065 100300 0077 General Co Bldg Occupancy Cost4303 9956 TRANSFERS - GOV/GOV 12,000 65 100300 0078 Gen Outside Agency Svc4309 2103 POSTAGE 107,600 65 100300 0078 Gen Outside Agency Svc4309 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV 141,000 65 100300 0078 Gen Outside Agency Svc4309 9975 MISC NON-TAXABLE REVENUE 33,400 65 100300 0079 Building Maintenance4070 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $300,000.0065 100300 0079 Building Maintenance4070 4956 TOOLS & SUNDRY EQUIPMENT $48,400.00Attachment Aa - Details of County Appropriation Adjustments3 of 6 AgencyFundDepartmentOrgAccountDecreaseIncreaseIncreaseDecreaseAppropriation/ExpenditureRevenue ModificationsDetails for Attachment C (County Appropriation Adjustments)Modifications (TC 27)(TC 24)65 100300 0079 Building Maintenance4070 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV1,220,000 65 100300 0079 Building Maintenance4070 2120 UTILITIES$1,250,000.0065 100300 0079 Building Maintenance4070 2360 INSURANCE$1,600,000.0065 100300 0079 Building Maintenance4070 3515 INT ON OTH LONG TERM DEBT$5,400.0065 100300 0079 Building Maintenance4070 9879 BLDG MTCE SERVICES 1,348,000 65 100300 0148 Print & Mail Services 4210 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 236,000 65 100300 0148 Print & Mail Services 4210 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES 11,800 65 100300 0148 Print & Mail Services 4210 2328 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE 839,000 65 100300 0148 Print & Mail Services 4241 9881 MICROFILM & REPRDCTN SVCS 50,000 65 100300 0148 Print & Mail Services 4243 9881 MICROFILM & REPRDCTN SVCS 264,000 65 100300 0148 Print & Mail Services 4243 9922 SALE OF EQUIPMENT 1,750 65 100300 0330 Co Drainage Maintenance0330 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV48,500 65 100300 0330 Co Drainage Maintenance0330 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV $500.0065 100300 0330 Co Drainage Maintenance0330 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS $49,000.0065 100300 0650 Public Works4500 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 35,000 65 100300 0650 Public Works4500 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $107,950.0065 100300 0650 Public Works4500 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP 2,240,000 65 100300 0650 Public Works4500 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES $2,276,000.0065 100300 0661 Road Construction4660 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP 8,000 65 100300 0661 Road Construction4660 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES 8,000 65 110300 0651 Public Works - Land Development 0651 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV $336,000.0065 110300 0651 Public Works - Land Development 0651 9951 REIMBURSEMENTS - GOV/GOV336,000 65 110800 0672 Road Maintenance0672 3560 DEPRECIATION300,000 65 110800 0672 Road Maintenance0672 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV$2,800,000.0065 110800 0672 Road Maintenance0672 4953 AUTOS & TRUCKS$3,000.0065 110800 0672 Road Maintenance0672 2319 PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS 5,200,000 65 110800 0672 Road Maintenance0672 8981 FUND BALANCE AVAILABLE 2,103,000 65 110800 0674 Miscellaneous Property0674 2282 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 1,000 65 110800 0674 Miscellaneous Property0674 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV500 65 110800 0674 Miscellaneous Property0674 8981 FUND BALANCE AVAILABLE 1,500 65 113200 0064 Walden Green Maintenance 0664 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV 100,000 65 113200 0064 Walden Green Maintenance 0664 9975 MISC NON-TAXABLE REVENUE 334,000 65 113200 0664 Walden Green Maintenance 0664 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS 410,000 65 113200 0664 Walden Green Maintenance 0664 4719 RENOVAT DESIGN WALDEN 1&2 844,000 65 124200 0637 Central Co Area of Benefit0637 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV$53,000.0065 124200 0637 Central Co Area of Benefit0637 8981 FUND BALANCE AVAILABLE $53,000.0065 129000 0653 Bethel Island Area of Benefit0653 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV$7,000.0065 129000 0653 Bethel Island Area of Benefit0653 8981 FUND BALANCE AVAILABLE $7,000.0065 140100 0843 Airport Fixed Assets4855 4664 BFA AIP28 ARFF TRMNL CNST 1,403,000 65 140100 0843 Airport Fixed Assets4855 4663 AIP 27 CCR SECURITY UPGDE $97,000.0065 140100 0843 Airport Fixed Assets4855 3560 DEPRECIATION$1,500,000.0065 140100 0844 Mariposa Project Comm Bnft4844 3612 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/ENT 40,000 65 140100 0844 Mariposa Project Comm Bnft4844 5012 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/ENT57,000 65 140100 0844 Mariposa Project Comm Bnft4844 8981 FUND BALANCE AVAILABLE 97,000 65 150100 0064 Fleet Internal Service Fund4282 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 900,000 65 150100 0064 Fleet Internal Service Fund4282 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV $435,000.0065 150100 0064 Fleet Internal Service Fund4282 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES300,000 65 150100 0064 Fleet Internal Service Fund4283 2271 VEHICLE REPAIRS 975,000 65 150100 0064 Fleet Internal Service Fund4284 4953 AUTOS & TRUCKS810,000 85 120600 0620 Library-Admin & Supp Svcs3702 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 20,000 85 120600 0620 Library-Admin & Supp Svcs3702 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV$20,000.0085 120600 0621 Library-Community Svcs3754 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 360,000 85 120600 0621 Library-Community Svcs3754 3620 GEN SVC-REQUESTED MNTCE 360,000 Attachment Aa - Details of County Appropriation Adjustments4 of 6 AgencyFundDepartmentOrgAccountDecreaseIncreaseIncreaseDecreaseAppropriation/ExpenditureRevenue ModificationsDetails for Attachment C (County Appropriation Adjustments)Modifications (TC 27)(TC 24)95 100300 0579 Veterans Service Office0579 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 5,000 95 100300 0579 Veterans Service Office0579 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV 5,000 02 100300 0025 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS 1690 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES $500.0002 100300 0025 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS 1693 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP 500 11 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4405 4356 001-651 PINE DEMO 4 11 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4405 4367 274-RECNFG STE 234 & 235 1 11 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4405 4382 012-PUB DFNDR REMODEL 1 11 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4405 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES 2 11 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4419 4322 387-REPLACE PLUMBING 6,730 11 100300 0111 Plant Acquisition - General Fund 4419 4332 733-CRISIS STBLZTN UNIT 6,730 02 100300 0145 Employee/Retiree Benefits1695 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $25,000.0002 100300 0145 Employee/Retiree Benefits1696 1044 RETIREMENT EXPENSE $25,000.0025 100300 0255 Sheriff2500 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV $17,000.0025 100300 0255 Sheriff2512 4365 000-SHERIFF FENCE $92,000.0025 100300 0255 Sheriff2512 4955 RADIO & COMMUNICATN EQUIP 92,000 25 100300 0277 Sheriff Contract Svcs2591 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 17,000 18 100300 0301 HLTH SVCS-DETENTN INMATES 5700 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $44,400.0018 100300 0301 HLTH SVCS-DETENTN INMATES 5700 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $214,250.0018 100300 0301 HLTH SVCS-DETENTN INMATES 5700 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 200 18 100300 0301 HLTH SVCS-DETENTN INMATES 5700 6214 SHERIFF CANTEEN-REHAB CL $200.0018 100300 0450 HEALTH SVCS-PUBLIC HEALTH 5750 2100 OFFICE EXPENSE476,360 18 100300 0450 HEALTH SVCS-PUBLIC HEALTH 5750 4954 MEDICAL & LAB EQUIPMENT 1 18 100300 0450 HEALTH SVCS-PUBLIC HEALTH 5750 4954 MEDICAL & LAB EQUIPMENT $94,500.0018 100300 0450 HEALTH SVCS-PUBLIC HEALTH 5750 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV 123,150 18 100300 0450 HEALTH SVCS-PUBLIC HEALTH 5761 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV $60.0018 100300 0450 HEALTH SVCS-PUBLIC HEALTH 5761 4310 157-REMODEL RESTROOMS $1.0018 100300 0451 CONSERVATOR/GUARDIANSHIP 0451 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $4.0018 100300 0451 CONSERVATOR/GUARDIANSHIP 0451 2110 COMMUNICATIONS $3.0018 100300 0451 CONSERVATOR/GUARDIANSHIP 0451 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV $1.0018 100300 0452 HEALTH SVCS-ENVIRON HLTH 5875 4948 MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT $91,405.0018 100300 0452 HEALTH SVCS-ENVIRON HLTH 5879 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES $120,345.0018 100300 0452 HEALTH SVCS-ENVIRON HLTH 5879 2110 COMMUNICATIONS $120,325.0018 100300 0452 HEALTH SVCS-ENVIRON HLTH 5879 3612 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/ENT 20 18 100300 0452 HEALTH SVCS-ENVIRON HLTH 5879 5022 INTRAFUND-TRANS-SERVICES 91,405 18 100300 0454 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR 0454 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 3 18 100300 0454 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR 0454 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 3 18 100300 0467 HLTH SERVICES-MNTL HLTH 5721 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 25,000 18 100300 0467 HLTH SERVICES-MNTL HLTH 5901 2340 OTHER INTRDPTMNTL CHARGES 25,800 18 100300 0467 HLTH SERVICES-MNTL HLTH 5999 4971 CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE 800 19 100300 0501 EHSD Administration Services 5101 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $1,235,000.0019 100300 0501 EHSD Administration Services 5101 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV $1,235,000.0065 100300 0650 Public Works4500 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP 70,100 65 100300 0650 Public Works4500 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV $70,100.0038 112000 0280 Conservation & Development2601 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 17,000 38 112000 0280 Conservation & Development2636 2479 OTHER SPECIAL DPMTAL EXP $17,000.0022 112600 0246 Dispute Resolution Program 0246 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS 6,500 22 112600 0246 Dispute Resolution Program 0246 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV $1,000.0018 113700 0468 HLTH SVCS-CHIP AB75 TOBAC 6021 2310 NON CNTY PROF SPCLZD SVCS $355.0018 113700 0468 HLTH SVCS-CHIP AB75 TOBAC 6021 3611 INTERFUND EXP - GOV/GOV 145 25 136000 0270 CENTRAL IDENTIFY BUREAU 0270 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV $634,000.0025 136000 0274 AB 8790274 5011 REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV $634,000.0018 145000 0540 HLTH SVS-HOSPITAL ENTRPRS 6200 1011 PERMANENT SALARIES 12,650,000 18 145000 0540 HLTH SVS-HOSPITAL ENTRPRS 6200 2802 REGISTRY 1 Attachment Aa - Details of County Appropriation Adjustments5 of 6 AgencyFundDepartmentOrgAccountDecreaseIncreaseIncreaseDecreaseAppropriation/ExpenditureRevenue ModificationsDetails for Attachment C (County Appropriation Adjustments)Modifications (TC 27)(TC 24)18 145000 0540 HLTH SVS-HOSPITAL ENTRPRS 6200 2889 OTHER EXPENSES $12,650,000.0018 145000 0540 HLTH SVS-HOSPITAL ENTRPRS 6555 3515 INT ON OTH LONG TERM DEBT$1.0018 145000 0853 HOSPITAL FIXED ASSETS 6971 4513 555-REDESIGN PHARMACY $47,488.0018 145000 0853 HOSPITAL FIXED ASSETS 6971 4532 201-PHARMACY CLEAN ROOM $17,885.0018 145000 0853 HOSPITAL FIXED ASSETS 6971 4533 201-RPLC PHRM DISP UNITS $50,404.0018 145000 0853 HOSPITAL FIXED ASSETS 6971 4537 201-LAB AUTOMATION $46,467.0018 145000 0853 HOSPITAL FIXED ASSETS 6971 4541 201-REPLACE CART WASHER $1,428.0018 145000 0853 HOSPITAL FIXED ASSETS 6971 4545 201-REPLC SURGICAL LIGHTS 2,766 18 145000 0853 HOSPITAL FIXED ASSETS 6971 4552 733-ADDITION/GENERATOR$55,749.0018 145000 0853 HOSPITAL FIXED ASSETS 6971 4562 201-MEASURE X PLANNING 58,569 18 145000 0853 HOSPITAL FIXED ASSETS 6971 4954 MEDICAL & LAB EQUIPMENT $280,756.0018 145000 0853 HOSPITAL FIXED ASSETS 6977 2862 REPAIRS & MTCE- EQUIPMENT $8,700.0018 145000 0853 HOSPITAL FIXED ASSETS 6979 3505 RETIRE OTH LONG TERM DEBT 8,700 18 146000 0860 CONTRA COSTA HEALTH PLAN 6100 2861 MEDICAL-PURCHASED SERVICE $2,730,000.0018 146000 0860 CONTRA COSTA HEALTH PLAN 6100 3580 CONTRIB TO OTHER AGENCIES 2,730,000 18 146100 0861 CCHP-COMMUNITY PLAN 6269 3580 CONTRIB TO OTHER AGENCIES $43,000.0018 146100 0861 CCHP-COMMUNITY PLAN 6271 2861 MEDICAL-PURCHASED SERVICE 43,000 22 112600 0246 Dispute Resolution Program 0246 8981 FUND BALANCE AVAILABLE 7,500 18 113700 0468 HLTH SVCS-CHIP AB75 TOBAC 6021 9956 TRANSFERS - GOV/GOV 500 TOTALS66,867,693 131,962,343 65,663,500 568,850 Attachment Aa - Details of County Appropriation Adjustments6 of 6 Attachment B (County - Schedules A, B, and C)DETAIL OF PROVISIONS FOR OBLIGATED FUND BALANCESOBLIGATEDTOTALFUND BALANCEOBLIGATEDAS OF CANCELLATIONSINCREASESFUND BALANCE FUND6/30/2022RECOMMENDADOPTRECOMMENDADOPTFOR BUDGET YEAR1003 NONSPENDABLE -INVENTORIES 2,776,6972,776,6971003 ASSIGNED -EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 6,461,6706,461,6701003 NONSPENDABLE -DEPARTMENTAL PETTY CASH 301,660301,6601003 RESTRICTED - EBRCS INVESTMENTS 1,059,4111,059,4111003 RESTRICTED - MEDICARE PART D 0 22,780,755 22,780,755 22,780,7551003 RESTRICTED - SELF INSURANCE TRUST FUND 0 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,0001003 RESTRICTED - CCTV/PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS 0 3,316,906 3,316,906 3,316,9061003 ASSIGNED -LITIGATION & AUDIT EXCEPTIONS 10,000,000 5,108,453 5,108,453 15,108,4531003 ASSIGNED - WORKDAY PROCUREMENT MODULE 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,0001003 ASSIGNED - CYBER SECURIY 2,200,0002,200,0001003 ASSIGNED -GENERAL FUND CAPITAL RESERVE 86,566,64719,562,06619,562,066106,128,7131003 ASSIGNED -MEASURE X-RESERVE 1,228,61618,771,38418,771,38420,000,0001003 ASSIGNED -GENERAL FUND RESERVE 377,931,309377,931,309 SUBTOTAL GENERAL FUND 488,526,010 0 0 77,539,564 77,539,564 566,065,5741041 ASSIGNED - CO SERVICE AREA REV RESERVE 100,000100,0001104 ASSIGNED -EQUIP REPL (CRIMINALISTICS LAB) 14,29914,2991108 NONSPENDABLE -PREPAID EXP (ROAD) 14,18514,1851108 ASSIGNED -EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT (ROAD) 6,952,4396,952,4391111 ASSIGNED - PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND 4,386,127 130,545 130,545 4,255,5821113 ASSIGNED -AFFORDABLE HOUSING 11,634,877 625,801 625,801 12,260,6781115 ASSIGNED -TOSCO/SOLANO TRANS MITIGATION 5,318,9875,318,9871116 NONSPENDABLE- PREPAID EXP (CHILD DEVLPMT) 965,730965,7301120 ASSIGNED -DEPT CONSERVATION & DEVLPMNT 34,696,333 726,837 726,837 35,423,1701120 NONSPENDABLE -PREPAID EXP (DCD) 305,148305,1481120 ASSIGNED -EQUIP REPL (DCD) 740,504740,5041126 ASSIGNED -DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROG 224,626224,6261127 NONSPENDABLE -PREPAID EXP (ZERO TOLERANCE) 13,64113,6411129 NONSPENDABLE -PREPAID EXP (DA REV NARCOTICS) 19,32419,3241131 NONSPENDABLE -PETTY CASH (DA FORFEITURE-FED) 3,5003,5001134 NONSPENDABLE -PETTY CASH (DCSS) 6006001134 ASSIGNED -EQUIP REPLACEMENT (DCSS) 56,10556,1051134 NONSPENDABLE -PREPAID EXPENSE (DCSS) 10,15510,1551146 ASSIGNED -PROP 63 62,596,529 23,467,277 23,467,277 86,063,8061147 NONSPENDABLE -PREPAID EXPENSE 19,38019,3801150 ASSIGNED -AUTOMATED SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT 2,701,256 185,954 185,954 2,515,3021153 ASSIGNED -CTY LOCAL REV FUND 2011 60,948,002 36,735,273 36,735,273 97,683,275SCHEDULE ACONTRA COSTA COUNTYFOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 FINAL BUDGETSPage 1 of 9 Attachment B (County - Schedules A, B, and C)DETAIL OF PROVISIONS FOR OBLIGATED FUND BALANCESOBLIGATEDTOTALFUND BALANCEOBLIGATEDAS OF CANCELLATIONSINCREASESFUND BALANCE FUND6/30/2022RECOMMENDADOPTRECOMMENDADOPTFOR BUDGET YEARSCHEDULE ACONTRA COSTA COUNTYFOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 FINAL BUDGETS1155 NONSPENDABLE -PREPAID EXPENSE (IHSS PUBLIC) 43,69043,6901157 ASSIGNED - COMM CORR PRFMC INCNTV RSRV 13,366,28813,366,2881159 RESTRICTED - L/M HSG ASSET FD-LMIHAF 15,045,965 30,696 30,696 15,015,2691206 ASSIGNED -LIBRARY AUTOMATION 7,824,979 792,232 792,232 8,617,2111206 ASSIGNED -LIBRARY FACILITIES 9,192,352 792,232 792,232 9,984,5841206 ASSIGNED -LIBRARY BRANCH OPERATIONS 11,383,000 792,232 792,232 12,175,2321206 ASSIGNED -EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT (LIBRARY) 87,91687,9161206 NONSPENDABLE -PETTY CASH (LIBRARY) 2,7102,7101206 NONSPENDABLE -PREPAID EXP (LIBRARY) 143,248143,2481232 ASSIGNED -WEST COUNTY AREA OF BENEFIT 157,040 26,985 26,985 130,0551234 ASSIGNED -NORTH RICHMOND AOB 3,857,276 1,883,130 1,883,130 5,740,4061240 ASSIGNED -MARTINEZ AREA OF BENEFIT 2,671,488 65,661 65,661 2,605,8271241 ASSIGNED -BRIONES AREA OF BENEFIT 456,699 85,444 85,444 542,1431242 ASSIGNED -CENTRAL COUNTY AREA OF BENEFIT 5,464,329 164,667 164,667 5,299,6621243 ASSIGNED -SO WC AREA OF BENEFIT 133,724 4 4 133,7281260 ASSIGNED -ALAMO AREA OF BENEFIT 1,138,939 84,279 84,279 1,223,2181270 ASSIGNED -SOUTH COUNTY AREA OF BENEFIT 2,681,470 14,777 14,777 2,696,2471282 ASSIGNED -EAST COUNTY AREA OF BENEFIT 4,645,990 466,318 466,318 4,179,6721290 ASSIGNED -BETHEL ISLAND AREA OF BENEFIT 296,843 1,431 1,431 295,4121337 ASSIGNED -LIVABLE COMMUNITIES 5,035,6495,035,6491390 ASSIGNED -ROAD DEVLPMNT DISCOVERY BAY 91,536 31,759 31,759 123,2951392 ASSIGNED -ROAD IMPROVEMENT FEE 21,228,618 57,219 57,219 21,171,3991394 ASSIGNED -ROAD DEVLPMNT RICH/EL SOBRANTE 373,392 6,399 6,399 366,9931395 ASSIGNED -ROAD DEVLPMNT BAY POINT AREA 1,993,136 11,441 11,441 2,004,5771399 ASSIGNED -ROAD DEVLPMNT PACHECO AREA 416,151 163,045 163,045 253,106 TOTAL GENERAL COUNTY FUNDS 787,980,185 1,298,920 1,298,920 143,582,282 143,582,282 930,263,547Page 2 of 9 Attachment B (County - Schedules A, B, and C) FUND BALANCEPER AUDITORAS OFFUND BALANCEFUND6/30/2022 ENCUMBRANCESASSIGNED AVAILABLE1003 GENERAL 749,509,887 119,960,421 42,697,099 523,368,475 63,483,8921041 COUNTY SERVICE AREA ADVANCES 100,000100,000 01056 LAW ENFORCEMENT - EQUIP REPLACE 3,701,7353,701,7351100 RECORDER MODERNIZATION 9,951,9349,951,9341101 COURT/CLERK AUTOMATION 78781102 FISH & GAME 817,508817,5081103 LAND DEVELOPMENT FUND 54,16654,1661104 CRIMINALISTICS LABORATORY 221,47214,299 207,1731105 SURVEY MONUMENT PRESERVATION330,780330,7801106 CRIMINAL JUSTICE CONSTRUCTION 1,067,3711,067,3711107 COURTHOUSE CONSTRUCTION 3,225,0853,225,0851108 ROAD 21,821,691 307,704 14,185 6,952,439 14,547,3631109 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT 3,3653,3651110 DRAINAGE AREA 9 302,670302,6701111 PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND 4,255,5824,255,582 01113 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 12,260,67812,260,678 01114 NAVY TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION 4,774,5484,774,5481115 TOSCO/SOLANO TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION 5,630,0355,318,987 311,0481116 CHILD DEVELOPMENT (2,237,528) 965,730 (3,203,258)1118 HUD NSP 255,266255,2661119 USED OIL RECYCLING GRANT 40,79540,7951120 CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT 36,510,584 41,762 305,148 36,163,674 01121 CDD/PWD JOINT REVIEW FEE 281,438281,4381122 DRAINAGE DEFICIENCY 2,524,1352,524,1351123 PUBLIC WORKS TRUST 475,256475,2561124 D.A. CONSUMER PROTECTION 1,096,7571,096,7571125 DOM. VIOLENCE VICTIM ASSIST. (23,439)(23,439)1126 DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROG. 202,728224,626 (21,898)1127 ZERO TOLERANCE-DOM VIOLENCE 717,44013,641 703,7991129 D.A. REVENUE NARCOTICS815,602 19,324 796,2781130 D.A. ENVIRON/OSHA 1,689,8371,689,8371131 D.A. FORFEITURE-FED-DOJ 2,469 3,500 (1,031)1132 WALDEN GREEN MAINTENANCE179,043179,0431134 CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES 801,854 4,137 10,755 56,105 730,857 & COMMITTEDSCHEDULE BCONTRA COSTA COUNTYFUND BALANCE AVAILABLELESS: OBLIGATED FUND BALANCESNONSPENDABLE, RESTRICTED Attachment B (County - Schedules A, B, and C) FUND BALANCEPER AUDITORAS OFFUND BALANCEFUND6/30/2022 ENCUMBRANCESASSIGNED AVAILABLE & COMMITTEDSCHEDULE BCONTRA COSTA COUNTYFUND BALANCE AVAILABLELESS: OBLIGATED FUND BALANCESNONSPENDABLE, RESTRICTED1135 EMERGENCY MED SVCS FUND 774,330774,3301137 HLT SVC - CHIP/AB75 TOBACCO 32321139 TRAFFIC SAFETY 385,392385,3921140 PUB PROTECT-SPEC REV FND 1,003,1421,003,1421141 SHERIFF NARCOTICS FORFEIT-ST/LOCAL 303,665303,6651142 SHERIFF NARCOTICS FORFEIT-FEDERAL 451,616451,6161143 SUP LAW ENFORCEMENT SVCS 12,263,70012,263,7001145 SHERIFF FORFEIT-FEDERAL DEPT OF TREASURY 589,675589,6751146 PROP 63 MH SVCS ACT 86,063,80686,063,806 01147 PRISONERS WELFARE FUND 3,016,220 19,380 2,996,8401149 PROBATION OFFICERS SPEC 36,57136,5711150 AUTOMATED SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT 2,700,3022,515,302 185,0001151 PROPERTY TAX ADMIN PROGRAM 3,177,7553,177,7551153 CTY LOCAL REV FUND 201199,039,27597,683,275 1,356,0001154 OBSCENE MATTER-MINORS 5,4435,4431155 IHSS PUBLIC AUTHORITY 19,212 43,690 (24,478)1156 DNA IDENTIFICATION 314,376314,3761157 COMM CORR PRFMC INCNTV FD 18,777,86313,366,288 5,411,5751158 NO RICH WST&RCVY MTGN FD 1,463,0231,463,0231159 L/M HSG ASSET FD-LMIHAF 15,015,269 15,015,269 01160 BAILEY RD MNTC SURCHARGE 3,255,7523,255,7521161 HOME INVSTMT PRTNRSHP ACT 2,438,8712,438,8711162 CASP CERT & TRAINING FUND 105,310105,3101206 LIBRARY 46,240,192 1,119,127 145,958 30,864,943 14,110,1641207 CASEY LIBRARY GIFT TRUST267,635267,6351231 HERCUL/RODEO/CROCK AREA OF BENEFIT 28,75928,7591232 WEST COUNTY AREA OF BENEFIT 128,055130,055 (2,000)1234 NORTH RICHMOND AREA OF BENEFIT 5,864,4065,740,406 124,0001240 MARTINEZ AREA OF BENEFIT 2,589,8272,605,827 (16,000)1241 BRIONES AREA OF BENEFIT 544,143542,143 2,0001242 CENTRAL COUNTY AREA OF BENEFIT 5,237,6625,299,662 (62,000)1243 SOUTH WALNUT CREEK AREA OF BENEFIT 133,728133,728 01260 ALAMO AREA OF BENEFIT 1,223,2181,223,218 01270 SOUTH COUNTY AREA OF BENEFIT 2,696,2472,696,247 01282 EAST COUNTY AREA OF BENEFIT 4,447,6724,179,672 268,000 Attachment B (County - Schedules A, B, and C) FUND BALANCEPER AUDITORAS OFFUND BALANCEFUND6/30/2022 ENCUMBRANCESASSIGNED AVAILABLE & COMMITTEDSCHEDULE BCONTRA COSTA COUNTYFUND BALANCE AVAILABLELESS: OBLIGATED FUND BALANCESNONSPENDABLE, RESTRICTED1290 BETHEL ISLAND AREA OF BENEFIT 295,412295,412 01328 COUNTY CHILDRENS 183,390183,3901332 ANIMAL BENEFIT 547,968547,9681334 CO-WIDE GANG & DRUG 651,849651,8491337 LIVABLE COMMUNITIES FUND 6,721,8295,035,649 1,686,1801349 HUD BLDG INSP NPP 204,702204,7021350 RETIREMENT UAAL BOND FUND (280,566)(280,566)1360 CENTRAL IDENTIFY BUREAU 156,453156,4531388 SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT OF WAY 4,284,8744,284,8741390 ROAD DEVELOPMENT DISCOVERY BAY123,295123,295 01392 ROAD IMPROVEMENT FEE 21,171,39921,171,399 01394 ROAD DEVELOPMENT RICHMOND/EL SOBRANTE366,993366,993 01395 ROAD DEVELOPMENT BAY POINT AREA 2,004,5772,004,577 01399 ROAD DEVELOPMENT PACHECO AREA579,196253,106 326,090 TOTAL GENERAL COUNTY FUNDS 1,219,456,704 121,433,151 59,253,679 871,009,868 167,760,006 Attachment B (County - Schedules A, B, and C)2022-23RECOMMENDED FINAL FINALBUDGET BUDGET YEAR-ENDFUND FUND FUNDFUND BALANCEBALANCEBALANCECHANGEAMOUNTB/U ACCT1003 GENERAL FUND 0 0 63,483,892 63,483,892 113,000 0002-23102,776,404 0003-2479540,000 0004-24791,513,210 0007-2479413,055 0015-24793,700,000 0025-2479119,690 0030-225125,000 0030-24791,592,437 0035-2479715,000 0043-24791,952,390 0043-4951205,000 0060-24793,750,000 0085-44701,000,000 0111-432836,967 0135-23102,575,097 0147-2251235,679 0147-24796,525,000 0235-2310321,149 0243-1011720,000 0255-49482,251,960 0265-24792,952,424 0308-247990,000 0335-225119,683 0335-4328150,000 0355-24795,200,000 0463-23408,250,000 0467-2320665,000 0501-4265250,000 0503-23101,000,000 0504-231019,000 0450-24796,000 0579-230316,000 0579-23402,040,233 0580-247910,000,000 0583-23101,756,300 0591-2310(11,786) 0650-2479RECOMMENDEDLINE ITEMCHANGESSCHEDULE CRECOMMENDED VS. FINAL BUDGETFUND BALANCE CHANGESAPPROPRIATIONS AND ESTIMATED REVENUE RECOMMENDATIONSFOR 2022-23 FINAL BUDGETPage 6 of 9 Attachment B (County - Schedules A, B, and C)2022-23RECOMMENDED FINAL FINALBUDGET BUDGET YEAR-ENDFUND FUND FUNDFUND BALANCEBALANCEBALANCECHANGEAMOUNTB/U ACCTRECOMMENDEDLINE ITEMCHANGESSCHEDULE CRECOMMENDED VS. FINAL BUDGETFUND BALANCE CHANGESAPPROPRIATIONS AND ESTIMATED REVENUE RECOMMENDATIONSFOR 2022-23 FINAL BUDGET1056 CO LAW ENF CMPTR CAP PROJ 0 0 3,701,735 3,701,735 435,701 0126-50111,253,596 0129-50112,012,438 0131-50111100 RECORDER MODERNIZATION 9,706,000 9,706,000 9,951,934 245,934 245,934 0353-24791101 COURT/CLERK AUTOMATION 0 0 78 78 78 0236-24791102 FISH & GAME 0 0 817,508 817,508 817,508 0367-24791103 LAND DEVELOPMENT FUND 0 0 54,166 54,166 54,166 0651-50111104 CRIMINALISTICS LABORATORY 0 0 207,173 207,173 207,173 0256-24791105 SURVEY MONUMENT PRESERVATION 325,000 325,000 330,780 5,780 5,780 0161-50111106 CRIMINAL JUSTICE CONSTRUCTION 162,000 162,000 1,067,371 905,371 905,371 0119-50161107 COURTHOUSE CONSTRUCTION (402,000) (402,000) 3,225,085 3,627,085 3,627,085 0122-36191108 ROAD 0 0 14,547,363 14,547,363 14,547,363 0662-50111109 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT 0 0 3,365 3,365 3,365 0663-36111110 DRAINAGE AREA 9 300,000 300,000 302,670 2,670 2,670 0120-50111114 NAVY TRANS MITIGATION 4,227,000 4,227,000 4,774,548 547,548 547,548 0697-50111115 TOSCO/SOLANO TRANS MTGTN 41,000 41,000 311,048 270,048 270,048 0699-50111116 CHILD DEVELOPMENT 0 0 (3,203,258) (3,203,258) (3,203,258) 0589-36111118 HUD NSP 0 0 255,266 255,266 255,266 0380-24791119 USED OIL RECYCLING GRANT 0 0 40,795 40,795 40,795 0119-36111121 CDD/PWD JOINT REVIEW FEE 217,000 217,000 281,438 64,438 64,438 0350-50111122 DRAINAGE DEFICIENCY 2,531,000 2,531,000 2,524,135 (6,865) (6,865) 0648-24791123 PUBLIC WORKS TRUST 473,000 473,000 475,256 2,256 2,256 0649-50111124 DA CONSUMER PROTECTION 0 0 1,096,757 1,096,757 1,096,757 0247-24791125 DOM. VIOLENCE VICTIM ASSIST 0 0 (23,439) (23,439) (23,439) 0585-24791126 DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROG 0 0 (21,898) (21,898) (21,898) 0246-24791127 ZERO TOLERANCE-DOM VIOLENCE 0 0 703,799 703,799 703,799 0586-24791129 D.A. REVENUE NARCOTICS (57,000) (57,000) 796,278 853,278 853,278 0244-24791130 D.A. ENVIRON/OSHA 60,000 60,000 1,689,837 1,629,837 1,629,837 0251-24791131 D.A. FORFEITURE-FED-DOJ 0 0 (1,031) (1,031) (1,031) 0234-24791132 WALDEN GREEN MAINTENANCE 176,000 176,000 179,043 3,043 3,043 0664-50111133 RE FRAUD PROSECUTE (280,000) (280,000) 482,367 762,367 762,367 0233-50111134 CCC DEPT CHILD SUPPORT SVCS 0 0 730,857 730,857 730,857 0249-10111135 EMERGENCY MED SVCS FUND 0 0 774,330 774,330 774,330 0471-36111137 HLTH SVC-CHIP/AB75 TOBACCO 0 0 32 32 32 0468-2310Page 7 of 9 Attachment B (County - Schedules A, B, and C)2022-23RECOMMENDED FINAL FINALBUDGET BUDGET YEAR-ENDFUND FUND FUNDFUND BALANCEBALANCEBALANCECHANGEAMOUNTB/U ACCTRECOMMENDEDLINE ITEMCHANGESSCHEDULE CRECOMMENDED VS. FINAL BUDGETFUND BALANCE CHANGESAPPROPRIATIONS AND ESTIMATED REVENUE RECOMMENDATIONSFOR 2022-23 FINAL BUDGET1139 TRAFFIC SAFETY 0 0 385,392 385,392 385,392 0368-24791140 PUBLIC PROTECTION-SPEC, REV 151,000 151,000 1,003,142 852,142 852,142 0260-24791141 SHER NARC FORFEIT-ST/LOCAL 0 0 303,665 303,665 303,665 0253-50111142 SHER NARC FORFEIT-FEDERAL 0 0 451,616 451,616 451,616 0252-50111143 SUP LAW ENFORCEMENT SVCS (446,000) (446,000) 12,263,700 12,709,700 1,522,588 0241-50110 (5,120) 0262-50110 505,093 0263-50110 10,687,139 0311-50111145 SHERIFF FORFEIT-FED TREASURY 0 0 589,675 589,675 589,675 0268-50111147 PRISONERS WELFARE FUND 325,000 325,000 2,996,840 2,671,840 2,671,840 0273-24791149 PROBATION OFFICERS SPEC 88,000 88,000 36,571 (51,429) (51,429) 0313-24791150 AUTOMATED SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT 185,000 185,000 185,000 0 01151 PROPERTY TAX ADMIN PROGRAM 3,160,000 3,160,000 3,177,755 17,755 17,755 0017-50161153 CNTY LOCAL REV FUND 1,356,000 1,356,000 1,356,000 0 01154 OBSCENE MATTER-MINORS 0 0 5,443 5,443 5,443 0254-50111155 IHSS PUBLIC AUTHORITY 0 0 (24,478) (24,478) (24,478) 0508-36111156 DNA IDENTIFICATION FUND 0 0 314,376 314,376 314,376 0275-50111157 COMM CORR PRFMC INCNTV FD 718,000 718,000 5,411,575 4,693,575 4,693,575 0477-50111158 NO RICH WST&RCVY MTGN FD 0 0 1,463,023 1,463,023 1,463,023 0478-50111160 BAILEY RD MNTC SURCHARGE 2,586,000 2,586,000 3,255,752 669,752 669,752 0660-36111161 HOME INVSTMT PRTNRSHP ACT 0 0 2,438,871 2,438,871 2,438,871 0561-24791162 CASP CERT & TRAINING FUND 0 0 105,310 105,310 105,310 0282-24791206 LIBRARY 0 0 14,110,164 14,110,164 100,000 3702-2310120,000 3703-4953203,662 3706-101125,000 3706-2310455,000 3706-247930,000 3706-3620100,000 3706-495315,000 3706-3615145,000 3714-2310499,000 3714-2490453,000 3714-49511,132,000 3722-2102251,371 3754-210250,000 3754-249025,000 3722-2490Page 8 of 9 Attachment B (County - Schedules A, B, and C)2022-23RECOMMENDED FINAL FINALBUDGET BUDGET YEAR-ENDFUND FUND FUNDFUND BALANCEBALANCEBALANCECHANGEAMOUNTB/U ACCTRECOMMENDEDLINE ITEMCHANGESSCHEDULE CRECOMMENDED VS. FINAL BUDGETFUND BALANCE CHANGESAPPROPRIATIONS AND ESTIMATED REVENUE RECOMMENDATIONSFOR 2022-23 FINAL BUDGET988,698 3906-10111,432,433 3906-249050,000 3906-362035,000 3906-36224,000,000 0113-44702,000,000 0113-42642,000,000 0113-42651207 CASEY LIBRARY GIFT TRUST 0 0 267,635 267,635 267,635 0622-36111231 HERCUL/RODEO/CROCK AREA OF BEN (4,000) (4,000) 28,759 32,759 32,759 0631-59111232 WEST COUNTY AREA OF BENEFIT (2,000) (2,000) (2,000) 0 01234 NORTH RICHMOND AREA OF BENEFIT 124,000 124,000 124,000 0 01240 MARTINEZ AREA OF BENEFIT (16,000) (16,000) (16,000) 0 01241 BRIONES AREA OF BENEFIT 2,000 2,000 2,000 0 01242 CENTRAL CO AREA/BENEFIT (62,000) (62,000) (62,000) 0 01260 ALAMO AREA OF BENEFIT (18,000) (18,000) 0 18,000 18,000 0641-50111270 SOUTH CO AREA OF BENEFIT (19,000) (19,000) 0 19,000 19,000 0642-50111282 EAST COUNTY AREA OF BENEFIT 268,000 268,000 268,000 0 01290 BETHEL ISL AREA OF BENEFIT 5,000 5,000 0 (5,000) (5,000) 0653-50111328 COUNTY CHILDRENS 0 0 183,390 183,390 183,390 0505-36111332 ANIMAL BENEFIT 430,000 430,000 547,968 117,968 117,968 0375-50111334 CO-WIDE GANG & DRUG 0 0 651,849 651,849 651,849 0271-24791337 LIVABLE COMMUNITIES FUND 1,682,000 1,682,000 1,686,180 4,180 4,180 0370-36111349 HUD BLDG INSP NPP 0 0 204,702 204,702 204,702 0597-36111350 RETIREMENT UAAL BOND FUND 0 0 (280,566) (280,566) (280,566) 0791-35101360 CENTRAL IDENTIFY BUREAU 0 0 156,453 156,453 156,453 0270-50111388 SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT OF WAY 4,243,000 4,243,000 4,284,874 41,874 41,874 0678-24791390 ROAD DEVELOPMENT DISCOVERY BAY 26,000 26,000 0 (26,000) (26,000) 0680-50111394 RD DEVELOPMENT RICH/EL SOBRANTE 4,000 4,000 0 (4,000) (4,000) 0684-50111395 RD DEVELOPMENT BAY POINT 336,000 336,000 0 (336,000) (336,000) 0685-50111399 ROAD DEVELOPMENT PACHECO AREA (9,000) (9,000) 326,090 335,090 335,090 0687-5011 TOTAL GENERAL COUNTY FUNDS 32,592,000 32,592,000 167,760,006 135,168,006 135,168,006Page 9 of 9 Attachment C - Special District Appropriation Adjustments1 of 7 Attachment C - Special District Appropriation Adjustments2 of 7 Attachment C - Special District Appropriation Adjustments3 of 7 Attachment C - Special District Appropriation Adjustments4 of 7 Attachment C - Special District Appropriation Adjustments5 of 7 Attachment C - Special District Appropriation Adjustments6 of 7 Attachment C - Special District Appropriation Adjustments7 of 7 AgencyFundDepartmentOrgAccountDecreaseIncreaseIncreaseDecrease70 202800 7028 Crockett Car Fire Protection 7028 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp25,000 70 202800 7028 Crockett Car Fire Protection 7028 3505 Retire Oth Long Term Debt/Lease 25,000 70 202000 7300 CCC Fire Protect-Consolidated 7300 1011 Permanent Salaries5,000 70 202000 7300 CCC Fire Protect-Consolidated 7300 6205 Parts Inventory Clearing5,000 72 253900 7539 Drainage Area 677539 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp100 72 253900 7539 Drainage Area 677539 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov100 72 254000 7540 Drainage Area 19A7540 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp2,000 72 254000 7540 Drainage Area 19A7540 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov 2,000 72 254100 7541 Drainage Area 33B7541 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp100 72 254100 7541 Drainage Area 33B7541 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov100 72 254400 7544 Drainage Area 727544 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp100 72 254400 7544 Drainage Area 727544 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov 100 72 254600 7546 Drainage Area 30B7546 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp1,000 72 254600 7546 Drainage Area 30B7546 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov 1,000 72 255800 7558 Drainage Area 30C7558 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp1,000 72 255800 7558 Drainage Area 30C7558 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov1,000 72 255900 7559 Drainage Area 15A7559 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp100 72 255900 7559 Drainage Area 15A7559 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov100 72 256100 7561 Drainage Area 33C7561 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov100 72 256100 7561 Drainage Area 33C7561 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov8,000 72 256100 7561 Drainage Area 33C7561 8981 Fund Balance Available8,100 72 256700 7567 Drainage Area 737567 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp1,000 72 256700 7567 Drainage Area 737567 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov1,000 72 257100 7571 Drainage Area 52C7571 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp1,000 72 257100 7571 Drainage Area 52C7571 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov1,000 72 257400 7574 Drainage Area 48B7574 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp1,000 72 257400 7574 Drainage Area 48B7574 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov1,000 72 257900 7579 Drainage Area 557579 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp10,000 72 257900 7579 Drainage Area 557579 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov4,000 72 257900 7579 Drainage Area 557579 8981 Fund Balance Available14,000 72 258400 7584 Drainage Area 52D7584 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp100 72 258400 7584 Drainage Area 52D7584 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov100 72 258500 7585 Drainage Area 877585 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp100 72 258500 7585 Drainage Area 877585 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov100 72 258700 7587 Drainage Area 897587 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp100 72 258700 7587 Drainage Area 897587 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov100 72 259500 7595 Drainage Area 1097595 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp100 72 259500 7595 Drainage Area 1097595 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov100 74 213600 7136 WCCHCD Debt Service7136 3505 Retire Other Long Term Debt/Lease10,000 74 213600 7136 WCCHCD Debt Service7136 2310 Non Cnty Prof/Spclzd Svcs 10,000 74 240500 7405 Service Area EM-1 Zone A7405 2310 Non Cnty Prof/Spclzd Svcs74,326 74 240500 7405 Service Area EM-1 Zone A7405 1011 Permanent Salaries 65,769 74 240500 7405 Service Area EM-1 Zone A7405 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov9,460 74 240500 7405 Service Area EM-1 Zone A7405 9069 Special Tax-Other903 74 240600 7406 Service Area EM-1 Zone B7406 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp200,000 74 240600 7406 Service Area EM-1 Zone B7406 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov200,000 Appropriation/Expenditure Revenue ModificationsDetails for Attachment C (Special District Appropriation Adjustments)Modifications (TC 27)(TC 24)Attachment Ca - Details of Special Districts Appropriation Adjustments1 of 3 AgencyFundDepartmentOrgAccountDecreaseIncreaseIncreaseDecreaseAppropriation/Expenditure Revenue ModificationsDetails for Attachment C (Special District Appropriation Adjustments) Modifications (TC 27) (TC 24)75 251700 7517 Stormwater Utility A-177517 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp50,000 75 251700 7517 Stormwater Utility A-177517 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov50,000 76 261700 7617 Svc Area P6 Zone 16127617 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov1,000 76 261700 7617 Svc Area P6 Zone 16127617 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov 1,000 76 265200 7652 Service Area PL2 Danville7652 2310 Non Cnty Prof/Spclzd Svcs100 76 265200 7652 Service Area PL2 Danville7652 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov 100 76 265300 7653 Service Area P-2 Zone A7653 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp75,000 76 265300 7653 Service Area P-2 Zone A7653 1011 Permanent Salaries100,000 76 265300 7653 Service Area P-2 Zone A7653 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov 30,000 76 265300 7653 Service Area P-2 Zone A7653 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov 42,000 76 265300 7653 Service Area P-2 Zone A7653 8981 Fund Balance Available 97,000 76 265700 7657 Service Area P-2 Zone B7657 1011 Permanent Salaries19,300 76 265700 7657 Service Area P-2 Zone B7657 2310 Non Cnty Prof/Spclzd Svcs 3,300 76 265700 7657 Service Area P-2 Zone B7657 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov 16,000 76 266200 7662 Service Area P6 Zone 2127662 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov5,500 76 266200 7662 Service Area P6 Zone 2127662 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov 5,500 76 266500 7665 Service Area P6 Zone 1203 7665 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp1,500 76 266500 7665 Service Area P6 Zone 1203 7665 3580 Taxes & Assessments 300 76 266500 7665 Service Area P6 Zone 1203 7665 5016 Trans-Gov/Gov 2,400 76 266500 7665 Service Area P6 Zone 1203 7665 9066 Special Tax-Fire/Police 1,200 76 266700 7667 Service Area P6 Zone 5057667 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp100 76 266700 7667 Service Area P6 Zone 5057667 3530 Taxes & Assessments 300 76 266700 7667 Service Area P6 Zone 5057667 9066 Special Tax-Fire/Police 200 76 266800 7668 Service Area P6 Zone 1007 7668 3530 Taxes & Assessments 300 76 266800 7668 Service Area P6 Zone 1007 7668 9066 Special Tax-Fire/Police300 76 267000 7670 Service Area P6 Zone 3113 7670 3530 Taxes & Assessments 300 76 267000 7670 Service Area P6 Zone 3113 7670 9066 Special Tax-Fire/Police 300 76 267700 7672 Service Area P6 Zone 2905 7672 3530 Taxes & Assessments 300 76 267700 7672 Service Area P6 Zone 2905 7672 9066 Special Tax-Fire/Police 300 76 267600 7776 Service Area P6 Zone 2904 7776 3530 Taxes & Assessments 300 76 267600 7776 Service Area P6 Zone 2904 7776 9066 Special Tax-Fire/Police 300 79 247600 7476 CSA M-31 PH BART7476 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp100 79 247600 7476 CSA M-31 PH BART7476 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov 100 79 248800 7488 Service Area M-16 Clyde Area 7488 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp2,000 79 248800 7488 Service Area M-16 Clyde Area 7488 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov 2,000 80 275100 7751 Service Area R-4 Moraga7751 2310 Non Cnty Prof/Spclzd Svcs625 80 275100 7751 Service Area R-4 Moraga7751 3580 Contribution to Other Agencies 940 80 275100 7751 Service Area R-4 Moraga7751 9013 Prop Tax-Unitary 315 81 270200 7702 Svc Area Lib-2 El Sobrante 7702 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov15,000 81 270200 7702 Svc Area Lib-2 El Sobrante 7702 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov 15,000 81 271000 7710 Svc Area Library-10 Pinole7710 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov100 81 271000 7710 Svc Area Library-10 Pinole7710 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov 100 81 271200 7712 Svc Area Library-12 Moraga 7712 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov1,000 81 271200 7712 Svc Area Library-12 Moraga 7712 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov 1,000 81 271300 7713 Svc Area Library-13 Ygnacio 7713 3611 Interfund Exp - Gov/Gov15,000 Attachment Ca - Details of Special Districts Appropriation Adjustments2 of 3 AgencyFundDepartmentOrgAccountDecreaseIncreaseIncreaseDecreaseAppropriation/Expenditure Revenue ModificationsDetails for Attachment C (Special District Appropriation Adjustments) Modifications (TC 27) (TC 24)81 271300 7713 Svc Area Library-13 Ygnacio 7713 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov15,000 82 260200 7602 Service Area D-2 WC7602 2479 Other Special Departmental Exp1,000 82 260200 7602 Service Area D-2 WC7602 5011 Reimbursements - Gov/Gov1,000 70 202200 7022 CCCFPD POB DEBT SVC FUND 7022 9951 REIMBURSEMENTS - GOV/GOV 44,000 70 202000 7300 CCC FIRE PROTECTION 7300 4955 RADIO & COMMUNICATN EQUIP 6,280 70 202000 7300 CCC FIRE PROTECTION 7300 4715 FS 2-UPGRADE GENERATOR 6,280 70 202200 7022 CCCFPD POB DEBT SVC FUND 7022 3501 PRINCIPAL PMT ON BONDS 44,000 70 202500 7025 CCCFPD CAPTL CONSTRUCTION 7025 4705 FS9-NEW FIRE STN CONCORD 2,792,135 70 202500 7025 CCCFPD CAPTL CONSTRUCTION 7025 4706 FS86-NEW FIRE STN BAY PNT 2,750,777 70 202500 7025 CCCFPD CAPTL CONSTRUCTION 7025 4718 000-FS54 DEMOLITION 40,576 70 202500 7025 CCCFPD CAPTL CONSTRUCTION 7025 4795 STATION 16 CONSTRUCTION 782 TOTALS3,307,866 3,474,784 166,918 - Attachment Ca - Details of Special Districts Appropriation Adjustments3 of 3 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE ADETAIL OF PROVISIONS FOR OBLIGATED FUND BALANCESFOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 FINAL BUDGETSCounty Special DistrictsOBLIGATEDAMOUNT MADE AVAILABLE INC. OR NEW OBLIG. FUND BAL TOTALFUND FUND BAL BY CANCELLATION TO BE PROVIDED OBLIGATEDDESCRIPTION - PURPOSE BALANCE FUND BALAS OF FOR6/30/2022 RECOMMENDEDADOPTED RECOMMENDEDADOPTED BUDGET YEARPUBLIC PROTECTIONFIRE PROTECTIONCCC FIRE DISTRICT CONSOLIDATED202000 NONSPENDABLE-PETTY CASH 500500202000ASSIGNED-GENERAL FUND RESERVE 43,863,936 2,884,038 2,884,038 46,747,974202000 NONSPENDABLE-INVENTORIES 866,393 866,393202000 NONSPENDABLE-PREPAID EXPENSE 39,991 39,991202200 NONSPENDABLE-PREPAID EXPENSE 21,056 21,056CCCFPD EMS TRANSPORTATION204000 NONSPENDABLE-PREPAID EXPENSE 617,127 617,127TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION 45,409,002 0 0 2,884,038 2,884,038 48,293,040FLOOD CONTROLCCC FLOOD CTL WTR CONS250500ASSIGNED-EQUIP REPLACEMENT 966,626 966,626250500 NONSPENDABLE-ADV TO OTHER FUNDS 2,686,000 2,686,000CCC FLOOD CTL 3B252000 NONSPENDABLE-ADV TO OTHER FUNDS 1,820,000 1,820,000FLD CNTRL DRNG AREA 56256600 NONSPENDABLE-ADV TO OTHER FUNDS 350,000 350,000TOTAL FLOOD CONTROL 5,822,626 0 0 0 0 5,822,626Page 1 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE ADETAIL OF PROVISIONS FOR OBLIGATED FUND BALANCESFOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 FINAL BUDGETSCounty Special DistrictsOBLIGATEDAMOUNT MADE AVAILABLE INC. OR NEW OBLIG. FUND BAL TOTALFUND FUND BAL BY CANCELLATION TO BE PROVIDED OBLIGATEDDESCRIPTION - PURPOSE BALANCE FUND BALAS OF FOR6/30/2022 RECOMMENDEDADOPTED RECOMMENDEDADOPTED BUDGET YEARSERVICE AREA POLICECSA P-1 POLICE265000 NONSPENDABLE-PREPAID EXPENSE 106,163 106,163SERV AREA P-2 ZONE A265300ASSIGNED-EQUIP REPLACEMENT 34,393 34,393POLICE AREA 5 RND HILL265500ASSIGNED-GENERAL RESERVE 987987SERV AREA P-2 ZONE B265700ASSIGNED-EQUIP REPLACEMENT 5,055 5,055TOTAL SERVICE AREA POLICE 146,598 0 0 0 0 146,598TOTAL PUBLIC PROTECTION 51,378,226 0 0 2,884,038 2,884,038 54,262,264HEALTH AND SANITATION EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES240500 SERV AREA EM-1 ZONE ANONSPENDABLE-PREPAID EXPENSE 24,064 24,064TOTAL EMERGENCY MEDICAL SRVCES 24,064 0 0 0 0 24,064TOTAL HEALTH AND SANITATION 24,064 0 0 0 0 24,064PUBLIC WAYS & FACILITIESSERVICE AREA MISCELLANEOUSSERV AREA M-17 MONTALVIN248900 NONSPENDABLE-PETTY CASH 5,000 5,000TOTAL SERVICE AREA MISCELLANEOUS 5,000 0 0 0 0 5,000TOTAL PUBLIC WAYS & FACILITIES 5,000 0 0 0 0 5,000Page 2 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE ADETAIL OF PROVISIONS FOR OBLIGATED FUND BALANCESFOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 FINAL BUDGETSCounty Special DistrictsOBLIGATEDAMOUNT MADE AVAILABLE INC. OR NEW OBLIG. FUND BAL TOTALFUND FUND BAL BY CANCELLATION TO BE PROVIDED OBLIGATEDDESCRIPTION - PURPOSE BALANCE FUND BALAS OF FOR6/30/2022 RECOMMENDEDADOPTED RECOMMENDEDADOPTED BUDGET YEARRECREATION & CULTURAL SVCSERVICE AREA RECREATIONSERV AREA R-7 ZONE A275800 NONSPENDABLE-PETTY CASH 5,000 5,000SERV AREA R-10 RODEO276000 NONSPENDABLE-PETTY CASH 3,000 3,000TOTAL SERVICE AREA RECREATION 8,000 0 0 0 0 8,000TOTAL RECREATION & CULTURAL SVC 8,000 0 0 0 0 8,000TOTAL OBLIGATED FUND BALANCES51,415,290 0 0 2,884,038 2,884,038 54,299,328Page 3 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE B2022-2023CONTRA COSTA COUNTYSPECIAL DISTRICTSFUND BALANCE AVAILABLEFundBalancePer AuditorFundas ofLess Obligated Fund BalancesBalanceDistrict 6/30/2022 EncumbrancesNonspendable, Restricted & CommittedAssigned AvailablePUBLIC PROTECTIONFIRE PROTECTION202000 7300 CCCFPD-Consolidated Fire 47,703,975 49,117 906,884 46,747,974 0202200 7022 CCCFPD POB Debt Svc Fund 11,178,438 21,056 11,157,382202400 7024 CCCFPD POB Stabilization Fund 24,777,634 24,777,634202500 7025 CCFPD CAPTL Construction 11,346,403 11,346,403202800 7028 Crockett-Carquinez Fire Dist 782,049782,049203100 7031 CCCFPD-Cap Outlay-Consolidated 636,289636,289203600 7036 CCCFPD New Devlpmt Pmt Fee FD 1,337,007 1,337,007203800 7038 CCCFPD Pittsburg Special FND 110,735110,735204000 7040 CCCFPD EMS Transport Fund 54,107,825 194,918 617,127 53,295,781TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION 151,980,356 244,036 1,545,066 46,747,974 103,443,280FLOOD CONTROL250500 7505 Flood Control & Wtr Conserv 10,889,750 2,686,000 966,626 7,237,124252000 7520 Flood Control Zone #3B 36,191,516 1,820,000 34,371,516252100 7521 Flood Control Zone #1 8,723,211 8,723,211252200 7522 Flood Control Zone #2 564564252600 7526 Flood Control Zone #6A17,13317,133252700 7527 Flood Control Zone #7 185,080185,080253000 7530 Flood Control Zone #8 82,52382,523253100 7531 Flood Control Zone #8A158,644158,644253200 7532 Flood Control Zone #9 24,74324,743253400 7534 Flood Control Drainage 37A5,5405,540253500 7535 Flood Control Drainage 33A215,980215,980253600 7536 Flood Control Drainage 75A398,192398,192253700 7537 Flood Control Drainage 128 104,725104,725253800 7538 Flood Control Drainage 57 159,332159,332253900 7539 Flood Control Drainage 67 42,18342,183254000 7540 Flood Control Drainage 19A573,114573,114254100 7541 Flood Control Drainage 33B 77,29777,297254200 7542 Flood Control Drainage 76 376,341376,341254300 7543 Flood Control Drainage 62 240,976240,976Page 4 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE B2022-2023CONTRA COSTA COUNTYSPECIAL DISTRICTSFUND BALANCE AVAILABLEFundBalancePer AuditorFundas ofLess Obligated Fund BalancesBalanceDistrict 6/30/2022 EncumbrancesNonspendable, Restricted & CommittedAssigned Available254400 7544 Flood Control Drainage 72 46,38646,386254500 7545 Flood Control Drainage 78 30,45430,454254600 7546 Flood Control Drainage 30B 1,990,844 1,990,844254700 7547 Flood Control Drainage 44B 471,782471,782254800 7548 Flood Control Drainage 29E 35,49635,496254900 7549 Flood Control Drainage 52B 108,756108,756255000 7550 Flood Control Drainage 290 32,86332,863255100 7551 Flood Control Drainage 300 95,73495,734255200 7552 Flood Control Drainage 13 6,146,958 6,146,958255300 7553 Flood Control Drainage 52A577,720577,720255400 7554 Flood Control Drainage 10 6,573,792 6,573,792255500 7555 Flood Control Drainage 29C 465,929465,929255600 7556 Flood Control Drainage 29D 72,69072,690255700 7557 Flood Control Drainage 30A64,00064,000255800 7558 Flood Control Drainage 30C 3,554,086 3,554,086255900 7559 Flood Control Drainage 15A151,992151,992256000 7560 Flood Control Drainage 910 229,151229,151256100 7561 Flood Control Drainage 33C 90,01290,012256200 7562 Flood Control Drainage 130 10,133,904 10,133,904256300 7563 Flood Control Drainage 127 17,37017,370256500 7565 Flood Control Drainage 40A830,053830,053256600 7566 Flood Control Drainage 56 10,773,839 350,000 10,423,839256700 7567 Flood Control Drainage 73 239,457239,457256800 7568 Flood Control Drainage 29G 954,296954,296256900 7569 Flood Control Drainage 29H 1,550,629 1,550,629257000 7570 Flood Control Drainage 29J 54,08454,084257100 7571 Flood Control Drainage 52C 4,142,368 4,142,368257200 7572 Flood Control Drainage 48C 654,545654,545257300 7573 Flood Control Drainage 48D 19,44719,447257400 7574 Flood Control Drainage 48B 1,395,789 1,395,789257500 7575 Flood Control Drainage 67A461,040461,040257600 7576 Flood Control Drainage 76A418,069418,069257700 7577 Flood Control Drainage 520 275,965275,965257800 7578 Flood Control Drainage 46 1,681,492 1,681,492Page 5 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE B2022-2023CONTRA COSTA COUNTYSPECIAL DISTRICTSFUND BALANCE AVAILABLEFundBalancePer AuditorFundas ofLess Obligated Fund BalancesBalanceDistrict 6/30/2022 EncumbrancesNonspendable, Restricted & CommittedAssigned Available257900 7579 Flood Control Drainage 55 759,399759,399258000 7580 Flood Control Drainage 1010 1,148,820 1,148,820258100 7581 Flood Control Drainage 101A955,203.59 955,203.59258200 7582 Flood Control Drainage 1010A370,853370,853258300 7583 Flood Control Drainage 16 1,964,501 1,964,501258400 7584 Flood Control Drainage 52D 26,71826,718258500 7585 Flood Control Drainage 87 46,55446,554258600 7586 Flood Control Drainage 88 20,89120,891258700 7587 Flood Control Drainage 89 121,804121,804258800 7588 Flood Control Drainage 22 189,267189,267259500 7595 Flood Control Drainage 109 21,11821,118259700 7597 Flood Control Drainage 47 258,842258,842TOTAL FLOOD CONTROL 118,691,805 0 4,856,000 966,626 112,869,179STORM DRAINAGE DISTRICTS259400 7594 Storm Drainage Zone #19 1,8591,859TOTAL STORM DRAINAGE DISTRICTS 1,859 0 0 0 1,859STORMWATER UTILITY DISTRICTS248400 7484 CCC CFD 2007-1 Stormwater34,79734,797250100 7501 Stormwater Util A-1 Ant 114,175114,175250200 7502 Stormwater Util A-2 Clyn 9,0849,084250300 7503 Stormwater Util A-3 Conc 104,075104,075250400 7504 Stormwater Util A-4 Danv 31,58631,586250700 7507 Stormwater Util A-7 Laf 29,95529,955250800 7508 Stormwater Util A-8 Mrtz 35,35335,353250900 7509 Stormwater Util A-9 Mrga 20,47520,475251000 7510 Stormwater Util A-10 Orin 28,74928,749251100 7511 Stormwater Util A-11 Pinl 25,50825,508251200 7512 Stormwater Util A-12 Pitt 93,18893,188251300 7513 Stormwater Util A-13 Pl H 38,07638,076251400 7514 Stormwater Util A-14 S Pb 40,11340,113251500 7515 Stormwater Util A-15 S Rm 50,89350,893251600 7516 Stormwater Util A-16 W Ck 99,24499,244251700 7517 Stormwater Util A-17 Co 4,794,046 4,794,046Page 6 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE B2022-2023CONTRA COSTA COUNTYSPECIAL DISTRICTSFUND BALANCE AVAILABLEFundBalancePer AuditorFundas ofLess Obligated Fund BalancesBalanceDistrict 6/30/2022 EncumbrancesNonspendable, Restricted & CommittedAssigned Available251800 7518 Stormwater Util A-18 Okly 21,30921,309251900 7519 Stormwater Util Admin 6,417,313 175,487 6,241,826252300 7523 Stormwater Util A-19 Rich 119,737119,737252500 7525 Stormwater Util A-5 El C 26,34026,340253300 7533 Stormwater Util A-20 Brnt 48,68648,686252400 7596 Stormwater Util A-6 Herc 39,70839,708TOTAL STORMWATER UTILITY DISTRICTS 12,222,407 175,487 0 0 12,046,920SERVICE AREA-POLICE260300 7603 Area P-6 Zone 502 4,8944,894260500 7605 Area P-6 Zone 1508 700700260600 7606 Area P-6 Zone 1614 1,5071,507260700 7607 Area P-6 Zone 1804 700700260800 7608 Area P-6 Zone 2201 1,5191,519260900 7609 Area P-6 Zone 501 2,2592,259261000 7610 Area P-6 Zone 1613 700700261100 7611 Area P-6 Zone 2200 700700261200 7612 Area P-6 Zone 2502 1,6681,668261300 7613 Area P-6 Zone 2801 2,0092,009261400 7614 Area P-6 Zone 1609 874874261500 7615 Area P-6 Zone 1610 873873261600 7616 Area P-6 Zone 1611 1,3931,393261700 7617 Area P-6 Zone 1612 249249261800 7618 Area P-6 Zone 2501 2,0852,085261900 7619 Area P-6 Zone 2800 2,1772,177262000 7620 Area P-6 Zone 1514 823823262100 7621 Area P-6 Zone 1101 700700262200 7622 Area P-6 Zone 1803 700700262300 7623 Area P-6 Zone 1700 3,5743,574262500 7625 Area P-6 Zone 2903 1,9301,930262400 7624 Area P-6 Zone 2000 1,6081,608262600 7626 Area P-6 Zone 1505 700700262700 7627 Area P-6 Zone 1506 880880262800 7628 Area P-6 Zone 1001 700700Page 7 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE B2022-2023CONTRA COSTA COUNTYSPECIAL DISTRICTSFUND BALANCE AVAILABLEFundBalancePer AuditorFundas ofLess Obligated Fund BalancesBalanceDistrict 6/30/2022 EncumbrancesNonspendable, Restricted & CommittedAssigned Available262900 7629 P-6 Central Admin Base 13,622,035 13,622,035263000 7630 Area P-6 Zone 1607 1,4181,418263100 7631 Area P-6 Zone 1504 1,0601,060263200 7632 Area P-6 Zone 2702 2,1212,121274500 7729 Area P-6 Zone 2703 1,5881,588263300 7633 Area P-6 Zone 1606 700700263400 7634 Area P-6 Zone 1605 700700263600 7636 Area P-6 Zone 1503 2,4822,482263700 7637 Area P-6 Zone 400 2,6652,665263800 7638 Area P-6 Zone 702 700700263900 7639 Area P-6 Zone 1502 700700264000 7640 Area P-6 Zone 3100 1,7061,706264100 7641 Area P-6 Zone 2500 1,9041,904264200 7642 Area P-6 Zone 701 2,3842,384264300 7643 Area P-6 Zone 202 1,5041,504264400 7644 Area P-6 Zone 1501 901901264500 7645 Area P-6 Zone 1604 1,7751,775264600 7646 Area P-6 Zone 1801 1,6391,639264700 7647 Area P-6 Zone 2901 2,3842,384264800 7648 Area P-6 Zone 1603 700700264900 7649 Area P-6 Zone 1200 700700265000 7650 Police SVC-Crockett Cogen 508,618 106,163 402,455265200 7652 Police Area 2 Danville 10,25410,254265300 7653 Area P-2 Zone A, Blackhawk 282,611 34,393 248,218265400 7654 Area P-6 Zone 2902 3,0183,018265500 7655 Area P-5, Roundhill Area 293,398 987 292,411265600 7656 Service Area PL6 7,068,661 7,068,661265700 7657 Area P-2 Zone B, Alamo 215,152 5,055 210,097265800 7658 Area P-6 Zone 206 986986265900 7659 Area P-6 Zone 207 1,8451,845266100 7661 Area P-6 Zone 200 1,6471,647266200 7662 Area P-16 Zone 212 700700266300 7663 Area P-6 Zone 2504 1,5351,535266500 7665 Area P6 zone 1203 805805Page 8 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE B2022-2023CONTRA COSTA COUNTYSPECIAL DISTRICTSFUND BALANCE AVAILABLEFundBalancePer AuditorFundas ofLess Obligated Fund BalancesBalanceDistrict 6/30/2022 EncumbrancesNonspendable, Restricted & CommittedAssigned Available266700 7667 Area P-6 Zone 505 312312266800 7668Area P6 zone 1007 943943267000 7670Area P6 zone 3113 4848267100 7671 Area P-6 Zone 209 843843267200 7372 Area P-6 Zone 211 700700267300 7673 Area P-6 Zone 1005 843843267400 7674 Area P-6 Zone 201 6,3446,344267500 7675 Area P-6 Zone 2700 1,6871,687267600 7776Area P-6 Zone 2904 473473267700 7672Area P-6 Zone 2905 148148268000 7680 Area P-6 Zone 700 2,3272,327268100 7681 Area P-6 Zone 1100 700700268200 7682 Area P-6 Zone 1600 2,2682,268268300 7683 Area P-6 Zone 2601 1,8561,856268400 7684 Area P-6 Zone 500 2,1292,129268500 7685 Area P-6 Zone 1000 1,1191,119268700 7687 Area P-6 Zone 2900 700700268800 7688 Area P-6 Zone 1006 843843268900 7689 Area P-6 Zone 1601 1,8001,800269000 7690 Area P-6 Zone 2300 1,6581,658269300 7693 Area P-6 Zone 1602 1,5041,504269400 7694 Area P-6 Zone 1800 2,3332,333269500 7695 Area P-6 Zone 2600 2,2632,263269600 7696 Area P-6 Zone 2701 2,8582,858269700 7697 Area P-6 Zone 1500 1,0791,079269900 7699 Area P-6 Zone 3000 1,7051,705271500 7735 Area P-6 Zone 1512 700700271600 7736 Area P-6 Zone 1608 741741271700 7737 Area P-6 Zone 1616 2,4182,418271800 7738 Area P-6 Zone 1802 700700271900 7739 Area P-6 Zone 2704 915915272000 7700 Area P-6 Zone 503 8,5458,545272100 7701 Area P-6 Zone 3103 700700272200 7703 Area P-6 Zone 900 1,6501,650Page 9 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE B2022-2023CONTRA COSTA COUNTYSPECIAL DISTRICTSFUND BALANCE AVAILABLEFundBalancePer AuditorFundas ofLess Obligated Fund BalancesBalanceDistrict 6/30/2022 EncumbrancesNonspendable, Restricted & CommittedAssigned Available272300 7704 Area P-6 Zone 1509 700700272400 7705 Area P-6 Zone 3101 700700272500 7706 Area P-6 Zone 1615 700700272600 7707 Area P-6 Zone 1511 858858272700 7708 Area P-6 Zone 1510 858858272800 7709 Area P-6 Zone 203 857857273000 7714 Area P-6 Zone 1002 700700273100 7715 Area P-6 Zone 2602 2,3042,304273200 7716 Area P-6 Zone 204 700700273300 7717 Area P-6 Zone 1003 700700273400 7718 Area P-6 Zone 1201 700700273500 7719 Area P-6 Zone 2203 5,0555,055273600 7720 Area P-6 Zone 3001 1,1591,159273700 7723 Area P-6 Zone 504 1,6171,617273800 7721 Area P-6 Zone 3102 2,1822,182273900 7722 Area P-6 Zone 3104 2,5332,533274000 7724 Area P-6 Zone 2202 2,9922,992274100 7725 Area P-6 Zone 205 1,0401,040274200 7726 Area P-6 Zone 301 2,4762,476274300 7727 Area P-6 Zone 1004 1,0141,014274400 7728 Area P-6 Zone 2603 700700274600 7746 Area P-6 Zone 3002 1,2731,273274700 7747 Area P-6 Zone 3105 791791274800 7748 Area P-6 Zone 3106 798798274900 7749 Area P-6 Zone 3107 1,8771,877277500 7745 Area P-6 Zone 0210 700700277600 7734 Area P-6 Zone 1513 500500277700 7741 Area P-6 Zone 2604 1,8151,815277800 7742 Area P-6 Zone 2605 700700277900 7743 Area P-6 Zone 3003 1,7991,799278000 7744 Area P-6 Zone 3004 850850278100 7731 Area P-6 Zone 3108 1,0991,099278200 7732 Area P-6 Zone 3109 1,6701,670Page 10 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE B2022-2023CONTRA COSTA COUNTYSPECIAL DISTRICTSFUND BALANCE AVAILABLEFundBalancePer AuditorFundas ofLess Obligated Fund BalancesBalanceDistrict 6/30/2022 EncumbrancesNonspendable, Restricted & CommittedAssigned Available278300 7733 Area P-6 Zone 3110 2,2552,255278500 7730 Area P-6 Zone 3112 2,3832,383278700 7677 Area P-6 Zone 2606 444444TOTAL SERVICE AREA-POLICE 22,182,273 0 106,163 40,435 22,035,675SERVICE AREA-DRAINAGE260200 7602 Area D-2,Walnut Creek 421,057421,057TOTAL SERVICE AREA-DRAINAGE 421,057 0 0 0 421,057Page 11 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE B2022-2023CONTRA COSTA COUNTYSPECIAL DISTRICTSFUND BALANCE AVAILABLEFundBalancePer AuditorFundas ofLess Obligated Fund BalancesBalanceDistrict 6/30/2022 EncumbrancesNonspendable, Restricted & CommittedAssigned AvailableMISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS277100 7771 Discovery Bay West Parking 23,08823,088282500 7825 Contra Costa Water Agency 2,986,818 2,986,818TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS 3,009,906 0 0 0 3,009,906TOTAL PUBLIC PROTECTION 308,509,664 419,523 6,507,229 47,755,034 253,827,877HEALTH AND SANITATIONEMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES240500 7405 Area EM-1, Zone A902 24,064 (23,162)213500 7135 WCC Hlthcare Dist 6,000,922 6,000,922213600 7136 WCC Debt SVC 7,151,636 7,151,636240600 7406 Area EM-1, Zone B 4,465,239 4,465,239TOTAL EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES 17,618,699 24,064 0 17,594,635TOTAL HEALTH AND SANITATION 17,618,699 0 24,064 0 17,594,635EDUCATIONSERVICE AREA-LIBRARY270200 7702 Area LIB-2,El Sobrante 56,73156,731271000 7710 Area LIB-10,Pinole 1,5621,562271200 7712 Area LIB-12,Moraga 10,33210,332271300 7713 Area LIB-13,Ygnacio 82,14382,143TOTAL SERVICE AREA-LIBRARY150,768 0 0 0 150,768TOTAL EDUCATION 150,768 0 0 0 150,768PUBLIC WAYS AND FACILITIESSERVICE AREA-LIGHTING240100 7394 Area L-100, Countywide 7,703,656 7,703,656248700 7487 CCC CFD 2010-1 St Lightng 132,159132,159TOTAL SERVICE AREA-LIGHTING 7,835,815 0 0 0 7,835,815Page 12 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE B2022-2023CONTRA COSTA COUNTYSPECIAL DISTRICTSFUND BALANCE AVAILABLEFundBalancePer AuditorFundas ofLess Obligated Fund BalancesBalanceDistrict 6/30/2022 EncumbrancesNonspendable, Restricted & CommittedAssigned AvailableSERVICE AREA-MISCELLANEOUS247000 7470 Area M-1, Delta Ferry 6,2456,245247300 7473 247300 - CSA M-28 767,306767,306247500 7475 Area M-29, Dougherty Valley 6,451,914 6,451,914247600 7476 Area M-31 PH BART 240,581240,581248000 7480 CSA T-1 Danville 3,344,968 3,344,968248500 7485 No Rchmd Mtce CFD 2006-1 426,853426,853248600 7486 Bart Trnsit VLG CFD 2008-1 173,624173,624248800 7488 Area M-16, Clyde 161,908 119,962 41,946248900 7489 Area M-17, Montalvin Manor182,228 5,000 177,228249200 7492 Area M-20, Rodeo 51,32851,328249600 7496 Area M-23, Blackhawk 214,729214,729249900 7499 Area M-30, Danville 85,88585,885TOTAL SERVICE AREA-MISCELLANEOUS 12,107,570 119,962 5,000 0 11,982,608SERVICE AREA-ROAD MAINTENANCE249400 7494 Area RD-4, Bethel Island 135,500135,500TOTAL SERVICE AREA-ROAD MAINTENANCE 135,500 0 0 0 135,500TOTAL PUBLIC WAYS AND FACILITIES 20,078,885 119,962 5,000 0 19,953,923RECREATION/CULTURAL SVCSSERVICE AREA-RECREATION275100 7751 Service Area R-4 Moraga 22275700 7757 Service Area R-9, El Sobrante 6,3316,331275800 7758 Service Area R-7,Zone A Alamo 4,789,689 5,000 4,784,689276000 7770 Service Area R-10, Rodeo 5,334 3,000 2,334TOTAL SERVICE AREA-RECREATION 4,801,357 0 8,000 0 4,793,357TOTAL RECREATION/CULTURAL SVCS 4,801,357 0 8,000 0 4,793,357TOTAL COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICTS351,159,373 539,484 6,544,293 47,755,034 296,320,561Page 13 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SCHEDULE CRECOMMENDED VS. FINAL BUDGETFUND BALANCE CHANGESAPPROPRIATION AND ESTIMATED REVENUE RECOMMENDATIONSFOR 2022-2023 FINAL BUDGET2022-2023 2022-2023 FINALRECOMMENDED FINAL YEAR-ENDBUDGET BUDGET FUND FUND RECOMMENDEDFUND FUND BALANCE BALANCE LINE ITEM CHANGESDISTRICTBALANCEBALANCEAVAILABLECHANGEAMOUNTB/U-ACCTPUBLIC PROTECTIONFIRE PROTECTION7022 CCCFPD POB Debt Svc Fund 11,176,000 11,176,000 11,157,382 (18,618)(18,618)7022-35017024 CCCFPD POB Stabilization Fund 24,814,000 24,814,000 24,777,634 (36,366)(36,366)7024-10447025 CCFPD CAPTL Construction (4,000,000) (4,000,000) 11,346,403 15,346,403 15,346,403 7025-47047028 Crockett-Carquinez Fire Dist 0 782,049 782,049 782,049 7028-24797031 CCCFPD-Cap Outlay-Consolidated 663,000 663,000 636,289 (26,711)(26,711)7031-47957036 CCCFPD New Devlpmt Pmt Fee FD 1,157,000 1,157,000 1,337,007 180,007 180,007 7036-22817038 CCCFPD Pittsburg Special Fund 110,000 110,000 110,735 735 735 7038-49537040 CCCFPD EMS Transport Fund 930,000 930,000 53,295,781 52,365,781 52,365,781 7040-2479TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION 34,850,000 34,850,000 103,443,280 68,593,280 68,593,280FLOOD CONTROL7505 Flood Control & Wtr Conserv 9,300,000 9,300,000 7,237,124 (2,062,876)(2,062,876)7505-24797520 Flood Control Zone #3B 43,209,000 43,209,000 34,371,516 (8,837,484)(8,837,484)7520-24797521 Flood Control Zone #1 10,910,000 10,910,000 8,723,211 (2,186,789)(2,186,789)7521-24797522 Flood Control Zone #2 1,000 1,000 564 (436)(436)7522-50117526 Flood Control Zone #6A 18,000 18,000 17,133 (867)(867)7526-24797527 Flood Control Zone #7 206,000 206,000 185,080 (20,920)(20,920)7527-23107530 Flood Control Zone #8 105,000 105,000 82,523 (22,477)(22,477)7530-23107531 Flood Control Zone #8A 192,000 192,000 158,644 (33,356)(33,356)7531-2340Page 14 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)7532 Flood Control Zone #9 4,000 4,000 24,743 20,743 20,743 7532-23407534 Flood Control Drainage 37A 6,000 6,000 5,540 (460)(460)7534-24797535 Flood Control Drainage 33A 219,000 219,000 215,980 (3,020)(3,020)7535-23407536 Flood Control Drainage 75A 538,000 538,000 398,192 (139,808)(139,808)7536-23107537 Flood Control Drainage 128 43,000 43,000 104,725 61,725 61,725 7537-23407538 Flood Control Drainage 57 24,000 24,000 159,332 135,332 135,332 7538-24797539 Flood Control Drainage 67 45,000 45,000 42,183 (2,817)(2,817)7539-23407540 Flood Control Drainage 19A 575,000 575,000 573,114 (1,886)(1,886)7540-23407541 Flood Control Drainage 33B 76,000 76,000 77,297 1,297 1,297 7541-24797542 Flood Control Drainage 76 384,000 384,000 376,341 (7,659)(7,659)7542-23107543 Flood Control Drainage 62 238,000 238,000 240,976 2,976 2,976 7543-23107544 Flood Control Drainage 72 46,000 46,000 46,386 386 386 7544-23107545 Flood Control Drainage 78 30,000 30,000 30,454 454 454 7545-50117546 Flood Control Drainage 30B 2,315,000 2,315,000 1,990,844 (324,156)(324,156)7546-23407547 Flood Control Drainage 44B 551,000 551,000 471,782 (79,218)(79,218)7547-23107548 Flood Control Drainage 29E 32,000 32,000 35,496 3,496 3,496 7548-23407549 Flood Control Drainage 52B 104,000 104,000 108,756 4,756 4,756 7549-24797550 Flood Control Drainage 290 36,000 36,000 32,863 (3,137)(3,137)7550-23407551 Flood Control Drainage 300 102,000 102,000 95,734 (6,266)(6,266)7551-23407552 Flood Control Drainage 13 6,424,000 6,424,000 6,146,958 (277,042)(277,042)7552-23107553 Flood Control Drainage 52A 576,000 576,000 577,720 1,720 1,720 7553-23407554 Flood Control Drainage 10 7,037,000 7,037,000 6,573,792 (463,208)(463,208)7554-23407555 Flood Control Drainage 29C 464,000 464,000 465,929 1,929 1,929 7555-23407556 Flood Control Drainage 29D 69,000 69,000 72,690 3,690 3,690 7556-24797557 Flood Control Drainage 30A 59,000 59,000 64,000 5,000 5,000 7557-35057558 Flood Control Drainage 30C 3,128,000 3,128,000 3,554,086 426,086 426,086 7558-23407559 Flood Control Drainage 15A 151,000 151,000 151,992 992 992 7559-23407560 Flood Control Drainage 910 237,000 237,000 229,151 (7,849)(7,849)7560-50117561 Flood Control Drainage 33C 81,000 81,000 90,012 9,012 9,012 7561-50117562 Flood Control Drainage 130 11,362,000 11,362,000 10,133,904 (1,228,096)(1,228,096)7562-50117563 Flood Control Drainage 127 65,000 65,000 17,370 (47,630)(47,630)7563-50117565 Flood Control Drainage 40A 820,000 820,000 830,053 10,053 10,053 7565-50117566 Flood Control Drainage 56 9,902,000 9,902,000 10,423,839 521,839 521,839 7566-24797567 Flood Control Drainage 73 240,000 240,000 239,457 (543)(543)7567-2340Page 15 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)7568 Flood Control Drainage 29G 1,730,000 1,730,000 954,296 (775,704)(775,704)7568-23407569 Flood Control Drainage 29H 1,451,000 1,451,000 1,550,629 99,629 99,629 7569-23407570 Flood Control Drainage 29J 102,000 102,000 54,084 (47,916)(47,916)7570-23107571 Flood Control Drainage 52C 4,865,000 4,865,000 4,142,368 (722,632)(722,632)7571-23107572 Flood Control Drainage 48C 657,000 657,000 654,545 (2,455)(2,455)7572-24797573 Flood Control Drainage 48D 30,000 30,000 19,447 (10,554)(10,554)7573-23407574 Flood Control Drainage 48B 1,600,000 1,600,000 1,395,789 (204,211)(204,211)7574-24797575 Flood Control Drainage 67A 461,000 461,000 461,040 40 40 7575-23107576 Flood Control Drainage 76A 449,000 449,000 418,069 (30,931)(30,931)7576-23407577 Flood Control Drainage 520 381,000 381,000 275,965 (105,035)(105,035)7577-24797578 Flood Control Drainage 46 1,646,000 1,646,000 1,681,492 35,492 35,492 7578-36117579 Flood Control Drainage 55 4,000 4,000 759,399 755,399 755,399 7579-23407580 Flood Control Drainage 1010 1,182,000 1,182,000 1,148,820 (33,180)(33,180)7580-23107581 Flood Control Drainage 101A 959,000 959,000 955,204 (3,796)(3,796)7581-23407582 Flood Control Drainage 1010A 373,000 373,000 370,853 (2,147)(2,147)7582-23107583 Flood Control Drainage 16 2,068,000 2,068,000 1,964,501 (103,499)(103,499)7583-23407584 Flood Control Drainage 52D 57,000 57,000 26,718 (30,282)(30,282)7584-24797585 Flood Control Drainage 87 51,000 51,000 46,554 (4,446)(4,446)7585-23107586 Flood Control Drainage 88 35,000 35,000 20,891 (14,109)(14,109)7586-24797587 Flood Control Drainage 89 169,000 169,000 121,804 (47,196)(47,196)7587-24797588 Flood Control Drainage 22 189,000 189,000 189,267 267 267 7588-23407595 Flood Control Drainage 109 18,000 18,000 21,118 3,118 3,118 7595-24797597 Flood Control Drainage 47 262,000 262,000 258,842 (3,158)(3,158)7597-2310TOTAL FLOOD CONTROL 128,663,000 128,663,000 112,869,179 (15,793,821)(15,793,821)STORM DRAINAGE DISTRICTS7594 Zone #19 2,000 2,000 1,859 (141)(141)7594-2340TOTAL STORM DRAINAGE DISTRICTS 2,000 2,000 1,859 (141)(141)STORMWATER UTILITY DISTRICTS7484 CCC CFD 2007-1 Stormwater 70,000 70,000 34,797 (35,203)(35,203)7484-24797501 Stormwater Util A-1 Ant 110,026 110,026 114,175 4,149 4,149 7501-23107502 Stormwater Util A-2 Clyn 8,425 8,425 9,084 659 659 7502-23107503 Stormwater Util A-3 Conc 73,995 73,995 104,075 30,080 30,080 7503-2310Page 16 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)7504 Stormwater Util A-4 Danv 22,749 22,749 31,586 8,837 8,837 7504-23107507 Stormwater Util A-7 Laf 30,139 30,139 29,955 (184)(184)7507-23107508 Stormwater Util A-8 Mrtz 24,986 24,986 35,353 10,367 10,367 7508-23107509 Stormwater Util A-9 Mrga 19,424 19,424 20,475 1,051 1,051 7509-23107510 Stormwater Util A-10 Orin 26,374 26,374 28,749 2,375 2,375 7510-23107511 Stormwater Util A-11 Pinl 26,522 26,522 25,508 (1,014)(1,014)7511-23107512 Stormwater Util A-12 Pitt 146,370 146,370 93,188 (53,182)(53,182)7512-23107513 Stormwater Util A-13 Pl H 21,577 21,577 38,076 16,499 16,499 7513-23107514 Stormwater Util A-14 S Pb 45,068 45,068 40,113 (4,955)(4,955)7514-23107515 Stormwater Util A-15 S Rm 62,586 62,586 50,893 (11,693)(11,693)7515-23107516 Stormwater Util A-16 W Ck 31,714 31,714 99,244 67,530 67,530 7516-23107517 Stormwater Util A-17 Co 8,158,000 8,158,000 4,794,046 (3,363,954)(3,363,954)7517-23107518 Stormwater Util A-18 Okly 27,253 27,253 21,309 (5,944)(5,944)7518-23107519 Stormwater Util Admin 4,742,143 4,742,143 6,241,826 1,499,683 1,499,683 7519-23107523 Stormwater Util A-19 Rich 84,804 84,804 119,737 34,933 34,933 7523-36117525 Stormwater Util A-5 El C 9,191 9,191 26,340 17,149 17,149 7525-23107533 Stormwater Util A-20 Brnt 48,686 48,686 48,686 (0)(0)7533-36117596 Stormwater Util A-6 Herc 30,321 30,321 39,708 9,387 9,387 7596-2310TOTAL STORMWATER UTILITY DISTRICTS 13,820,353 13,820,353 12,046,920 (1,773,433)(1,773,433)SERVICE AREA-POLICE7603 Area P-6 Zone 502 0 0 4,894 4,894 4,894 7603-35307605 Area P-6 Zone 1508 0 0 700 700 700 7605-35307606 Area P-6 Zone 1614 0 0 1,507 1,507 1,507 7606-35307607 Area P-6 Zone 1804 0 0 700 700 700 7607-35307608 Area P-6 Zone 2201 0 0 1,519 1,519 1,519 7608-35307609 Area P-6 Zone 501 0 0 2,259 2,259 2,259 7609-35307610 Area P-6 Zone 1613 0 0 700 700 700 7610-35307611 Area P-6 Zone 2200 0 0 700 700 700 7611-35307612 Area P-6 Zone 2502 0 0 1,668 1,668 1,668 7612-35307613 Area P-6 Zone 2801 0 0 2,009 2,009 2,009 7613-35307614 Area P-6 Zone 1609 0 0 874 874 874 7614-35307615 Area P-6 Zone 1610 0 0 873 873 873 7615-35307616 Area P-6 Zone 1611 0 0 1,393 1,393 1,393 7616-3530Page 17 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)7617 Area P-6 Zone 1612 0 0 249 249 249 7617-35307618 Area P-6 Zone 2501 0 0 2,085 2,085 2,085 7618-35307619 Area P-6 Zone 2800 0 0 2,177 2,177 2,177 7619-35307620 Area P-6 Zone 1514 0 0 823 823 823 7620-35307621 Area P-6 Zone 1101 0 0 700 700 700 7621-35307622 Area P-6 Zone 1803 0 0 700 700 700 7622-35307623 Area P-6 Zone 1700 0 0 3,574 3,574 3,574 7623-35307625 Area P-6 Zone 2903 0 0 1,930 1,930 1,930 7625-35307624 Area P-6 Zone 2000 0 0 1,608 1,608 1,608 7624-35307626 Area P-6 Zone 1505 0 0 700 700 700 7626-35307627 Area P-6 Zone 1506 0 0 880 880 880 7627-35307628 Area P-6 Zone 1001 0 0 700 700 700 7628-35307629 P-6 Central Admin Base 11,489,555 11,489,555 13,622,035 2,132,480 2,132,480 7629-24797630 Area P-6 Zone 1607 0 0 1,418 1,418 1,418 7630-35307631 Area P-6 Zone 1504 0 0 1,060 1,060 1,060 7631-35307632 Area P-6 Zone 2702 0 0 2,121 2,121 2,121 7632-35307729 Area P-6 Zone 2703 0 0 1,588 1,588 1,588 7729-35307633 Area P-6 Zone 1606 0 0 700 700 700 7633-35307634 Area P-6 Zone 1605 0 0 700 700 700 7634-35307636 Area P-6 Zone 1503 0 0 2,482 2,482 2,482 7636-35307637 Area P-6 Zone 400 0 0 2,665 2,665 2,665 7637-35307638 Area P-6 Zone 702 0 0 700 700 700 7638-35307639 Area P-6 Zone 1502 0 0 700 700 700 7639-35307640 Area P-6 Zone 3100 0 0 1,706 1,706 1,706 7640-35307641 Area P-6 Zone 2500 0 0 1,904 1,904 1,904 7641-35307642 Area P-6 Zone 701 0 0 2,384 2,384 2,384 7642-35307643 Area P-6 Zone 202 0 0 1,504 1,504 1,504 7643-35307644 Area P-6 Zone 1501 0 0 901 901 901 7644-35307645 Area P-6 Zone 1604 0 0 1,775 1,775 1,775 7645-35307646 Area P-6 Zone 1801 0 0 1,639 1,639 1,639 7646-35307647 Area P-6 Zone 2901 0 0 2,384 2,384 2,384 7647-35307648 Area P-6 Zone 1603 0 0 700 700 700 7648-35307649 Area P-6 Zone 1200 0 0 700 700 700 7649-35307650 Police SVC- Crockett Cogen 0 0 402,455 402,455 402,455 7650-2160Page 18 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)7652 Police Area 2 Danville 9,019 9,019 10,254 1,235 1,235 7652-23107653 Area P-2 Zone A, Blackhawk 15,765 15,765 248,218 232,453 232,453 7653-24797654 Area P-6 Zone 2902 0 0 3,018 3,018 3,018 7654-35307655 Area P-5, Roundhill Area 25,732 25,732 292,411 266,679 266,679 7655-10117656 Service Area PL6 298,837 298,837 7,068,661 6,769,824 6,769,824 7656-50117657 Area P-2 Zone B, Alamo 45,122 45,122 210,097 164,975 164,975 7657-10117658 Area P-6 Zone 206 0 0 986 986 986 7658-35307659 Area P-6 Zone 207 0 0 1,845 1,845 1,845 7659-35307661 Area P-6 Zone 200 0 0 1,647 1,647 1,647 7661-35307662 Area P-6 Zone 212 0 0 700 700 700 7662-35307663 Area P-6 Zone 2504 0 0 1,535 1,535 1,535 7663-35307665 Area P-6 Zone 1203 0 0 805 805 805 7665-24797667 Area P-6 Zone 505 0 0 312 312 312 7667-24797668 Area P-6 Zone 1007 0 0 943 943 943 7668-24797670 Area P-6 Zone 3113 0 0 48 48 48 7670-24797671 Area P-6 Zone 209 0 0 843 843 843 7671-24797372 Area P-6 Zone 211 0 0 700 700 700 7372-35307673 Area P-6 Zone 1005 0 0 843 843 843 7673-35307674 Area P-6 Zone P-7 201 0 0 6,344 6,344 6,344 7674-50167675 Area P-6 Zone 2700 0 0 1,687 1,687 1,687 7675-35307776 Area P-6 Zone 2904 0 0 473 473 473 7776-24797672 Area P-6 Zone 2905 0 0 148 148 148 7672-24797680 Area P-6 Zone 700 0 0 2,327 2,327 2,327 7680-35307681 Area P-6 Zone 1100 0 0 700 700 700 7681-35307682 Area P-6 Zone 1600 0 0 2,268 2,268 2,268 7682-35307683 Area P-6 Zone 2601 0 0 1,856 1,856 1,856 7683-35307684 Area P-6 Zone 500 0 0 2,129 2,129 2,129 7684-35307685 Area P-6 Zone 1000 0 0 1,119 1,119 1,119 7685-35307687 Area P-6 Zone 2900 0 0 700 700 700 7687-35307688 Area P-6 Zone 1006 0 0 843 843 843 7688-35307689 Area P-6 Zone 1601 0 0 1,800 1,800 1,800 7689-35307690 Area P-6 Zone 2300 0 0 1,658 1,658 1,658 7690-35307693 Area P-6 Zone 1602 0 0 1,504 1,504 1,504 7693-35307694 Area P-6 Zone 1800 0 0 2,333 2,333 2,333 7694-3530Page 19 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)7695 Area P-6 Zone 2600 0 0 2,263 2,263 2,263 7695-35307696 Area P-6 Zone 2701 0 0 2,858 2,858 2,858 7696-35307697 Area P-6 Zone 1500 0 0 1,079 1,079 1,079 7697-35307699 Area P-6 Zone 3000 0 0 1,705 1,705 1,705 7699-35307700 Area P-6 Zone 503 0 0 8,545 8,545 8,545 7700-35307701 Area P-6 Zone 3103 0 0 700 700 700 7701-35307703 Area P-6 Zone 900 0 0 1,650 1,650 1,650 7703-35307704 Area P-6 Zone 1509 0 0 700 700 700 7704-35307705 Area P-6 Zone 3101 0 0 700 700 700 7705-35307706 Area P-6 Zone 1615 0 0 700 700 700 7706-35307707 Area P-6 Zone 1511 0 0 858 858 858 7707-35307708 Area P-6 Zone 1510 0 0 858 858 858 7708-35307709 Area P-6 Zone 203 0 0 857 857 857 7709-35307714 Area P-6 Zone 1002 0 0 700 700 700 7714-35307715 Area P-6 Zone 2602 0 0 2,304 2,304 2,304 7715-35307716 Area P-6 Zone 204 0 0 700 700 700 7716-35307717 Area P-6 Zone 1003 0 0 700 700 700 7717-35307718 Area P-6 Zone 1201 0 0 700 700 700 7718-35307719 Area P-6 Zone 2203 0 0 5,055 5,055 5,055 7719-35307720 Area P-6 Zone 3001 0 0 1,159 1,159 1,159 7720-35307721 Area P-6 Zone 3102 0 0 2,182 2,182 2,182 7721-35307722 Area P-6 Zone 3104 0 0 2,533 2,533 2,533 7722-35307723 Area P-6 Zone 504 0 0 1,617 1,617 1,617 7723-35307724 Area P-6 Zone 2202 0 0 2,992 2,992 2,992 7724-35307725 Area P-6 Zone 205 0 0 1,040 1,040 1,040 7725-35307726 Area P-6 Zone 301 0 0 2,476 2,476 2,476 7726-35307727 Area P-6 Zone 1004 0 0 1,014 1,014 1,014 7727-35307728 Area P-6 Zone 2603 0 0 700 700 700 7728-35307746 Area P-6 Zone 3002 0 0 1,273 1,273 1,273 7746-35307747 Area P-6 Zone 3105 0 0 791 791 791 7747-35307748 Area P-6 Zone 3106 0 0 798 798 798 7748-35307749 Area P-6 Zone 3107 0 0 1,877 1,877 1,877 7749-35307745 Area P-6 Zone 0210 0 0 700 700 700 7745-35307734 Area P-6 Zone 1513 0 0 500 500 500 7734-3530Page 20 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)7741 Area P-6 Zone 2604 0 0 1,815 1,815 1,815 7741-35307742 Area P-6 Zone 2605 0 0 700 700 700 7742-35307743 Area P-6 Zone 3003 0 0 1,799 1,799 1,799 7743-35307744 Area P-6 Zone 3004 0 0 850 850 850 7744-35307731 Area P-6 Zone 3108 0 0 1,099 1,099 1,099 7731-35307732 Area P-6 Zone 3109 0 0 1,670 1,670 1,670 7732-35307733 Area P-6 Zone 3110 0 0 2,255 2,255 2,255 7733-35307730 Area P-6 Zone 3112 0 0 2,383 2,383 2,383 7730-35307677 Area P-6 Zone 2606 0 0 444 444 444 7677-35307735 Area P-6 Zone 1512 0 0 700 700 700 7735-35307736 Area P-6 Zone 1608 0 0 741 741 741 7736-35307737 Area P-6 Zone 1616 0 0 2,418 2,418 2,418 7737-35307738 Area P-6 Zone 1802 0 0 700 700 700 7738-35307739 Area P-6 Zone 2704 0 0 915 915 915 7739-3530TOTAL SERVICE AREA-POLICE 11,884,030 11,884,030 22,035,675 10,151,645 10,151,645SERVICE AREA-DRAINAGE7602 Area D-2,Walnut Creek 425,000 425,000 421,057 (3,943)(3,943)7602-2310TOTAL SERVICE AREA-DRAINAGE 425,000 425,000 421,057 (3,943)(3,943)MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS7771 Discovery Bay West Parking 23,148 23,148 23,088 (60)(60)7771-23107825 Contra Costa Water Agency 0 0 2,986,818 2,986,818 2,986,818 7825-2479TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS 23,148 23,148 3,009,906 2,986,758 2,986,758TOTAL PUBLIC PROTECTION 189,667,531 189,667,531 253,827,877 64,160,346 64,160,346HEALTH AND SANITATIONEMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES7405 Area EM-1, Zone A (67,000) (67,000) (23,162) 43,838 43,838 7405-24797135 WCC HLTHCARE DIST 1,774,500 1,774,500 6,000,922 4,226,422 4,226,422 7135-23107136 WCCHCD DEBT SVC 0 0 7,151,636 7,151,636 7,151,636 7136-35057406 Area EM-1, Zone B 762,000 762,000 4,465,239 3,703,239 3,703,239 7406-2479TOTAL EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES 2,469,500 2,469,500 17,594,635 15,125,135 15,125,135Page 21 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)TOTAL HEALTH AND SANITATION 2,469,500 2,469,500 17,594,635 15,125,135 15,125,135EDUCATIONSERVICE AREA-LIBRARY7702 Area LIB-2,El Sobrante 0 56,731 56,731 56,731 7702-36117710 Area LIB-10,Pinole 0 1,562 1,562 1,562 7710-36117712 Area LIB-12,Moraga 0 10,332 10,332 10,332 7712-36117713 Area LIB-13,Ygnacio 0 82,143 82,143 82,143 7713-3611TOTAL SERVICE AREA-LIBRARY 0 0 150,768 150,768 150,768TOTAL EDUCATION 0 0 150,768 150,768 150,768PUBLIC WAYS AND FACILITIESSERVICE AREA-LIGHTING7394 Area L-100, Countywide 7,471,365 7,471,365 7,703,656 232,291 232,291 7394-24797487 CCC CFD 2010-1 St Lightng 133,650 133,650 132,159 (1,491)(1,491)7487-5011TOTAL SERVICE AREA-LIGHTING 7,605,015 7,605,015 7,835,815 230,800 230,800SERVICE AREA-MISCELLANEOUS7470 Area M-1, Delta Ferry 3,882 3,882 6,245 2,363 2,363 7470-24797473 CSA M-28 745,504 745,504 767,306 21,802 21,802 7473-24797475 Area M-29, Dougherty Valley 6,054,826 6,054,826 6,451,914 397,088 397,088 7475-24797476 Area M-31, PH BART 239,826 239,826 240,581 755 755 7476-23107480 CSA T-1 Danville 3,072,425 3,072,425 3,344,968 272,543 272,543 7480-24797485 No Rchmd Mtce CFD 2006-1 427,286 427,286 426,853 (433)(433)7485-24797486 Bart Trnsit VLG CFD 2008-1 275,453 275,453 173,624 (101,829)(101,829)7486-24797488 Area M-16, Clyde 108,013 108,013 41,946 (66,067)(66,067)7488-50117489 Area M-17, Montalvin Manor 195,888 195,888 177,228 (18,660)(18,660)7489-24797492 Area M-20, Rodeo 37,114 37,114 51,328 14,214 14,214 7492-24797496 Area M-23, Blackhawk 153,913 153,913 214,729 60,816 60,816 7496-35807499 Area M-30 Danville 89,585 89,585 85,885 (3,700)(3,700)7499-2479TOTAL SERVICE AREA-MISCELLANEOUS 11,403,715 11,403,715 11,982,608 578,893 578,893Page 22 of 23 Attachment D (Special Districts ‐ Schedules A, B, and C)SERVICE AREA-ROAD MAINTENANCE7494 Area RD-4, Bethel Island 136,444 136,444 135,500 (944)(944)7494-2479TOTAL SERVICE AREA-ROAD MAINTENAN136,444 136,444 135,500 (944)(944)TOTAL PUBLIC WAYS AND FACILITIES 19,145,174 19,145,174 19,953,923 808,749 808,749RECREATION/CULTURAL SVCSSERVICE AREA-RECREATION7751 Service Area R-4 Moraga 0 2 2 2 7751-36117757 Area R-9, El Sobrante 0 6,331 6,331 6,331 7757-24797758 Area R-7,Zone A Alamo 4,888,878 4,888,878 4,784,689 (104,189)(104,189)7758-47557770 Area R-10, Rodeo 157 157 2,334 2,177 2,177 7770-24797980 Area R-8 Debt Svc, Walnut Creek 0 0 0 0 7980-2479TOTAL SERVICE AREA-RECREATION 4,889,035 4,889,035 4,793,357 (95,678)(95,678)TOTAL RECREATION/CULTURAL SVCS 4,889,035 4,889,035 4,793,357(95,678) (95,678)TOTAL COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICTS216,171,240 216,171,240 296,320,561 80,149,321 80,149,321Page 23 of 23