HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 08162017 - Finance Cte Agenda Pkt
FINANCE COMMITTEE
August 16, 2017
2:00 P.M.
651 Pine Street, Room 101, Martinez
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, Chair
Supervisor John Gioia, Vice Chair
Agenda
Items:
Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference
of the Committee
1.Introductions
2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this
agenda (speakers may be limited to three minutes).
3. CONSIDER approving the Record of Action for the June 26, 2017, Finance Committee
meeting (Tim Ewell, Senior Deputy County Administrator)
4. CONSIDER accepting a report on the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) regarding
short-term rentals such as Airbnb and consider any additional information requests of
staff and a potential recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. (John Kopchik, DCD
Director)
5. CONSIDER accepting a report on funding an immigrants rights program in Contra
Costa, and DIRECT staff on next steps (Ali Saidi, Contra Costa Immigrant Rights
Alliance).
6.The next meeting is currently scheduled for September 25, 2017.
7.Adjourn
The Finance Committee will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities
planning to attend Finance Committee meetings. Contact the staff person listed below at least 72
hours before the meeting.
Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and
distributed by the County to a majority of members of the Finance Committee less than 96 hours
prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 651 Pine Street, 10th floor, during
normal business hours.
Public comment may be submitted via electronic mail on agenda items at least one full work day
prior to the published meeting time.
For Additional Information Contact:
Lisa Driscoll, Committee Staff
Phone (925) 335-1021, Fax (925) 646-1353
lisa.driscoll@cao.cccounty.us
FINANCE COMMITTEE 3.
Meeting Date:08/16/2017
Subject:Record of Action for June 26, 2017 Finance Committee Meeting
Submitted For: FINANCE COMMITTEE,
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: N/A
Referral Name: Record of Action
Presenter: Tim Ewell, Senior Deputy
County Administrator
Contact: Tim Ewell, Senior Deputy County
Administrator 925-335-1036
Referral History:
County Ordinance requires that each County body keep a record of its meetings. Though the
record need not be verbatim, it must accurately reflect the agenda and the discussions made in the
meetings.
Referral Update:
Attached for the Committee's consideration is the Record of Action for its June 26, 2017 meeting.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
Staff recommends approval of the Record of Action for the June 26, 2017 meeting.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
No fiscal impact.
Attachments
Draft Record of Action June 26, 2017
For Additional Information Contact:Lisa Driscoll, Committee Staff
Phone (925) 335-1021, Fax (925) 646-1353
lisa.driscoll@cao.cccounty.us
D R A F T
FINANCE COMMITTEE
June 26, 2017
9:00 A.M.
651 Pine Street, Room 101, Martinez
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, Chair
Supervisor John Gioia, Vice Chair
Agenda Items:Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the Committee
Present: Karen Mitchoff, Chair
John Gioia, Vice Chair
Staff Present:Lisa Driscoll, Finance Director
Annie O, Chief of Staff, District IV
Tim Ewell, Senior Deputy County Administrator
Ali Saidi, Public Defenders Office
Attendees: Greg Colley, Catholics United for Justice
Debra Bernstein, Monument Impact
1. Introductions
2. Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda (speakers may be limited to three minutes).
There were no comments from the Public on any items not on the agenda.
3. Staff recommends approval of the Record of Action for the April 24, 2017 meeting.
The Record of Action for the April 24, 2017 meeting was approved as recommended.
AYE: Chair Karen Mitchoff, Vice Chair John Gioia
Passed
4. ACCEPT Quarterly Capital Projects update.
Ramesh Kanzaria presented the Quarterly Capital Report. Mr. Kanzaria reviewed the summary page in detail. There are currently 67 projects funded at $284.0 million. There were 7
new projects since the last report totaling $2.6 million and 12 projects were completed ($14.9 million). In addition there are 19 Facilities Life-Cycle Investment Program (FLIP) projects
under Capital Projects management totaling $19.6 million and nine FLIP projects in progress under facilities maintenance. Highlights were provided of some of the major projects
currently underway. Supervisor Mitchoff asked that a list of all Department of Conservation and Development satellites offices be included in the minutes. The Department has two
satellite offices: 3685 Mt Diablo Blvd, Suite 120, Lafayette (1,700 square feet) and 1120 2nd Street, Brentwood, Suite 101 (570 square feet). The Department of Conservation and
Developments pays the rent on both satellites. There were no further questions.
5. Accept report, and DIRECT staff regarding next steps of assessing local needs, learning from other models, and deciding what is best for Contra Costa.
Karen Mitchoff requested that Ali Saidi give an update on the proposal under review and consideration for funding an immigrants rights program in Contra Costa. Mr. Saidi thanked
the Committee and indicated the East Bay Community Foundation may give them funding for plan design. He had recently attended a regional meeting on the topic and was excited
about the possibility of forming a new coalition alliance in Contra Costa. Mr. Saidi informed the Committee that program design would take approximately thirty days to complete. Mr.
Greg Colley of Catholics United for Justice spoke in favor of a Contra Costa program. He said that his organization was aligned with the Bishops to urge adoption of a program that
aligns with the values of Catholic families. Debra Bernstein of Monument Impact echoed Mr. Colley's comments. She stressed urgency and said that funding a program was the most
positive thing the County can do for the community. Supervisor Mitchoff said that the County Board was concerned and sympathetic to this issue. She reminded the audience that the
Board had recently funded Contra Costa Cares by explaining how health impacts the entire community. The Committee scheduled the next Finance Committee meeting for August 16,
2017 at 2:00 to hear the updated proposal.
AYE: Chair Karen Mitchoff, Vice Chair John Gioia
Passed
6. The next meeting is scheduled for July 31, 2017 (rescheduled from July 24).
The July 31 meeting was cancelled and a new meeting date was set for August 16 at 2:00.
7. Adjourn
The Finance Committee will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend Finance Committee meetings. Contact the staff person listed below at least 72 hours before the meeting.
Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the County to a majority of members of the Finance Committee less than 96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 651 Pine Street, 10th floor, during
normal business hours.
Public comment may be submitted via electronic mail on agenda items at least one full work day prior to the published meeting time.
1 of 1 8/10/17, 3:04 PM
FINANCE COMMITTEE 4.
Meeting Date:08/16/2017
Subject:Transient Occupancy Tax Collection for Short Term Rentals (Airbnb)
Submitted For: FINANCE COMMITTEE,
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: 5-9-17 C.49
Referral Name: Electronic Hosting Platform Rental Revenues
Presenter: John Kopchik, Department of Conservation and
Development Director
Contact: 925-674-7819
Referral History:
On May 9, 2017, the Board of Supervisors referred to the Finance Committee the issue of
exploring opportunities for revenue from AirBNB rentals and similar electronic hosting platform
rentals in the unincorporated areas.
Referral Update:
See attached report from the Department of Conservation and Development.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
ACCEPT report on the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) regarding short-term rentals such as
Airbnb and consider any additional information requests of staff and a potential recommendation
to the Board of Supervisors.
Attachments
Report on TOT Collection for Short Term Rentals (Airbnb)
Transient Occupancy Tax Ordinance 64-4
City of Santa Monica Regulations
City of Richmond Regulations
1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
DEPT. OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
30 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553
DATE: August 16, 2017
TO: Finance Committee
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV, Chair
Supervisor John Gioia, District I, Vice Chair
FROM: John Kopchik, Director, Department of Conservation and Development
By: Kristine Solseng, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: Transient Occupancy Tax Collection for Short Term Rentals (Airbnb)
RECOMMENDATIONS
ACCEPT report on the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) regarding short-term rentals such as Airbnb
and CONSIDER any additional information requests of staff and a potential recommendation to the
Board of Supervisors.
Background
On May 9, 2017 the Board of Supervisors referred to the Finance Committee the issue of exploring
opportunities for revenue from Airbnb within the unincorporated areas of the County. This report
explores mechanisms and issues related to collecting TOT and other revenue from these types of
rentals.
Contra Costa County has a transient occupancy tax (“TOT”) ordinance (see attached) which authorizes
the collection of a 10% tax on the rent charged. Currently, the following hotels in the unincorporated
area ) are subject to the TOT: Embassy Suites (unincorporated Walnut Creek area), Crowne Plaza
(unincorporated Concord area), Burlington Hotel (Port Costa), and The Renaissance Club Sport Hotel
(unincorporated Walnut Creek area. The county collects between $2 to $2.5 million per year from the
TOT.
There have been an increasing number of short-term, online rental services providing accommodations
in private homes and apartments similar to those historically provided only by traditional hotels and
motels. Airbnb is the most popular web based service, which allows individuals to list, find, and rent
lodging. There are similar electronic hosting platforms such as Homeway/VRBO and TurnKey.
Currently, there is no revenue collected from these short-term home and apartment rentals.
2
TOT Collection and Short-Term Rentals
Current TOT Collection:
The County collects TOT from “operators” of “hotels.” The County's TOT ordinance defines
the terms “hotel” and “operator.” In the view of staff, Airbnb rentals appear to fall into the
County's definition of “hotel.” The term “operator” is defined as “the person who is proprietor
of the hotel, whether in the capacity of owner, lessee, sub-lessee, mortgagee in possession,
licensee, or any other capacity. Where the operator performs his functions through a managing
agent of any type or character other than an employee, the managing agent shall also be
deemed an operator for the purposes of this chapter and shall have the same duties and
liabilities as his principal.”
The TOT Ordinance Code requires hotel operators to register with the tax administrator and
obtain a certificate. The Ordinance also requires operators to make quarterly reports to the tax
administrator of the total rents charged and taxes collected. The administrative burden of
requiring every individual who wants to use their property as an Airbnb rental to fulfill the
registration and reporting requirements would likely be cost prohibitive. Presumably, this is
why local agencies have sought to have the electronic hosting platform collect the tax.
Local Agency Approaches to Collecting TOT on Short-Term Rentals:
There are two approaches to collecting TOT from Short-Term Rentals. One is require hosts
and hosting sites to collect and remit TOT to local agencies, and the other is to enter into a
Voluntary Compliance Agreement with the hosting site.
o Short Term Rental TOT Collection by Ordinance:
Some jurisdictions have enacted laws to require the collection of TOT from short-term
rentals. In June of 2015, the City of Santa Monica established a "Home-Sharing
Ordinance" (see attached). This ordinance requires hosts (property owners) and hosting
platforms, such as Airbnb and VRBO, to be responsible for collecting TOT. Santa
Monica's regulations specify that:
“If the Hosting Platform collects payment for the rental, the hosting platform and the
host shall both have legal responsibility for the collection of all applicable TOT and
remittance of the collected tax to the City on a monthly basis.”
o Airbnb Voluntary Compliance Agreement:
A number of jurisdictions (e.g., San Jose, Richmond, Pinole, Sonoma County) have
entered into Voluntary Compliance Agreements (VCA) with Airbnb whereby the
hosting platform agrees to collect the TOT on behalf of the property owner and pay it to
the city or county. As part of the VCA terms, Airbnb will provide a quarterly summary
of TOT collected, but it does not provide information about specific hosts or rental
units. Some jurisdictions have concerns over the lack of transparency about who is
hosting and where the units are located. Staff was unable to find similar agreement with
Home Away/VBRO. This may be because VRBO has been a marketing platform versus
Airbnb’s business model as a transactional service. A copy of the City of Richmond’s
Airbnb Voluntary Compliance Agreement is attached.
Potential Revenue from Short-Term Rentals
The revenue generated from an agreement depends on the number of Airbnb units rented in
unincorporated Contra Costa County. Based on a preliminary review of Airbnb listings, there
3
are an estimated 200 listings in unincorporated Contra Costa County. Considering a very
conservative estimate of $80/night with a two-night stay and each unit rented twice a month,
the County would receive about $76,800 in additional revenue annually.
State Laws Imposing Collection Obligations on Airbnb:
California State Senator McGuire introduced legislation in both 2015 and 2016 to regulate
short-term rentals, in particular collection of TOT. Neither bill was passed and some of the
unresolved issues include:
o Role of the State and local jurisdictions in the collection of TOT and regulating short
term rentals;
o Level of transparency required by hosting sites to state and local jurisdictions; and
o Conflicting interests from hotel/labor organizations and hosting site/hosts.
Other Regulatory Issues
Zoning:
In considering whether to impose TOT on short-term rentals, some jurisdictions have elected to
change their ordinances to remove prohibitions against renting out property on a short-term
basis, thus allowing greater access to Airbnb services. Other jurisdictions have limited short-
term rental by requiring additional permitting/registration, restricting the type of unit allowed to
be rented (hosted vs non-hosted), restricting the duration a unit may be rented, and requiring
additional conditions related to health/safety. The Board has directed the Department of
Conservation and Development to review current zoning regulations and further examine the
need for additional regulation of short-term rentals. It is anticipated DCD will report to the
Board on this issue in September 2017. The Board may wish to consider coordinating the
exploration of the zoning issue with its review of revenue actions from these types of rentals.
Business Tax:
The Ordinance Code requires anyone operating a business in the unincorporated area to obtain
a business license. If the estimated 200 hosts in unincorporated Contra Costa County are
required to pay the Business License Tax, it could generate $20,000 annually. However, this
may be a very optimistic amount because businesses with annual gross receipts of less than
$20,000 per year are exempt from the Business License Tax. Additionally, hosting sites may
not release the names of their hosts providing a challenge for enforcement.
Page 1
Chapter 64-4 - TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX
Sections:
Article 64-4.2. General Provisions
64-4.202 - Title.
This chapter shall be known as the "uniform transient occupancy tax ordinance of Contra Costa
County."
(Prior code § 2530).
64-4.204 - Definitions.
Except where the context otherwise requires, the definitions given in this section govern the
construction of this chapter:
(1) "Person" means any individual, firm, partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal
organization, joint stock company, corporation, estate trust, business trust, receiver, trustee,
syndicate, or any other group or combination acting as a unit.
(2) "Hotel" means any structure, or any portion of any structure, which is occupied or intended or
designed for occupancy by transients for dwelling, lodging or sleeping purposes, and includes
any hotel, inn, tourist home or house, motel, studio hotel, bachelor hotel, lodging house, rooming
house, apartment house, dormitory, public or private club, m obile home or house trailer at a fixed
location, or other similar structure or portion thereof.
(3) "Occupancy" means the use or possession, or the right to the use or possession of any room or
rooms or portion thereof, in any hotel for dwelling, lodging or sleeping purposes.
(4) "Transient" means any person who exercises occupancy or is entitled to occupancy by reason of
concession, permit, right of access, license or other agreement for a period of thirty consecutive
calendar days or less, counting portions of calendar days as full days, and excluding tenancies
from month to month. Any such person so occupying space in a hotel shall be deemed to be a
transient until the period of thirty days has expired unless there is an agreement in writing between
the operator and the occupant providing for a longer period of occupancy. In determining whether
a person is a transient, uninterrupted periods of time extending both prior and subsequent to the
effective date of this chapter may be considered.
(5) "Rent" means the consideration charged, whether or not received, for the occupancy of space in
a hotel valued in money, whether to be received in money, goods, labor or otherwise, including
all receipts, cash, credits and property and services of any kind or nature , without any deduction
therefrom whatsoever.
(6) "Operator" means the person who is proprietor of the hotel, whether in the capacity of owner,
lessee, sublessee, mortgagee in possession, licensee, or any other capacity. Where the operator
performs his functions through a managing agent of any type or character other than an
employee, the managing agent shall also be deemed an operator for the purposes of this chapter
and shall have the same duties and liabilities as his principal. Compliance with the prov isions of
this chapter by either the principal or the managing agent shall, however, be considered to be
compliance by both.
(7) "Tax administrator" means the Contra Costa County treasurer-tax collector and his duly appointed
deputies.
Page 2
(Ord. 1891: prior code § 2530.1).
Article 64-4.4. Imposition and Administration
64-4.402 - Rate.
For the privilege of occupancy in any hotel, each transient is subject to and shall pay a tax in the
amount of ten percent of the rent charged by the operator. This tax constitutes a debt owed by the transient
to the county which is extinguished only by payment to the operator or to the county. The transient shall
pay the tax to the operator of the hotel at the time the rent is paid. If the rent is paid in installments, a
proportionate share of the tax shall be paid with each installment. The unpaid tax shall be due upon the
transient's ceasing to occupy space in the hotel. If for any reason the tax due is not paid to the operator of
the hotel, the tax administrator may require that such tax shall be paid directly to the tax administrator.
(Ords. 90-102, § 1; 83-38, § 1; 80-73, § 1; prior code § 2530.2: Ord. 1891).
64-4.404 - Imposition - Exemptions.
No tax shall be imposed upon:
(1) Any person as to whom, or any occupancy as to which, it is beyond the power of the county to
impose the tax herein provided;
(2) Any federal or state of California officer or employee when on official business;
(3) Any officer or employee of a foreign government who is exempt by reason of expre ss provision
of federal law or international treaty.
No exemption shall be granted except upon a claim therefor made at the time rent is collected and
under penalty of perjury upon a form prescribed by the tax administrator.
(Ords. 1891: prior code § 2530.3).
64-4.406 - Administration - Operator's duties.
Each operator shall collect the tax imposed by this chapter to the same extent and at the same time
as the rent is collected from every transient. The amount of tax shall be separately stated from the amount
of the rent charged, and each transient shall receive a receipt for payment from the operator. No operator
of a hotel shall advertise or state in any manner, whether directly or indirectly, that the tax or any part there of
will be assumed or absorbed by the operator, or that it will not be added to the rent, or that, if added any
part will be refunded except in the manner hereinafter provided.
(Ord. 1891: prior code § 2530.4).
64-4.408 - Administration-Registration of hotel.
Within thirty days after the effective date of this chapter, or within thirty days after commencing
business, whichever is later, each operator of any hotel renting occupancy to transients shall register the
hotel with the tax administrator and obtain from him a "transient occupancy registration certificate" to be at
all times available upon demand on the premises by a transient or the tax administrator. Whenever there is
a change in the identity of the owner or operator of any such hotel, the operat or must secure a new "transient
occupancy registration certificate" for the premises and the tax administrator may require the payments of
all approved transient occupancy taxes, whether due or not as a condition to the issuance of such new
certificate. The certificate shall, among other things, state the following:
Page 3
(1) The name and address of the operator;
(2) The name and address of the owner;
(3) The name and address of the hotel;
(4) The date upon which the certificate was issued;
(5) "This Transient Occupancy Registration Certificate signifies that the operator named on the face
hereof has fulfilled the requirements of the Uniform Transient Occupancy Tax Ordinance by
registering with the Tax Administrator for the purpose of collecting from transien ts the Transient
Occupancy Tax and remitting said tax to the Tax Administrator. This certificate does not authorize
any person to conduct any unlawful business or to conduct any lawful business in an unlawful
manner, nor to operate a hotel without strictly complying with all local applicable laws, including
but not limited to those requiring a permit from any board, commission, department or office of
this county. This certificate does not constitute a permit."
(Ord. 1891: prior code § 2530.5).
64-4.410 - Administration — Reporting and remitting.
Each operator shall, on or before the last day of the month following the close of each calendar quarter,
or at the close of any shorter reporting period which may be established by the tax administrator, make a
return to the tax administrator, on forms provided by him, of the total rents charged and received and the
amount of tax collected for transient occupancies. At the time the return is file the full amount of the tax
collected shall be remitted to the tax a dministrator. Returns and payments are due immediately upon
cessation of business for any reason. All taxes collected by operators pursuant to this chapter shall be held
in trust for the account of the county until payment thereof is made to the tax administrator.
(Ord. 1891: prior code § 2530.6).
Article 64-4.6. Penalties and Interest
64-4.602 - Penalties and interest—Generally.
(a) Original Delinquency: Any operator who fails to remit any tax imposed by this chapter and collected
by the operator, within the time required, shall pay a penalty of ten percent of the amount of the tax in
addition to the amount of the tax.
(b) Continued Delinquency: Any operator who fails to remit any delinquent tax and accrued penalty on or
before a period of thirty days following the date on which such tax first became delinquent shall pay a
second delinquency penalty of ten percent of the amount of the tax in addition to the amount of the tax
and the ten percent penalty first imposed.
(c) Fraud: If the tax administrator makes a written finding of facts showing that the nonpayment of any tax
or penalties due under this chapter is due to fraud, a penalty of twenty-five percent of the amount of
the tax shall be added thereto in addition to the penalties stated in subsection s (a) and (b).
(d) Interest: In addition to the penalties imposed, any operator who fails to remit any tax imposed by this
chapter shall pay interest at the rate of one-half of one percent per month or fraction thereof on the
amount of the tax, exclusive of penalties, from the date on which the remittance first became delinquent
until paid.
(e) Penalties Merged With Tax: Every penalty imposed and such interest as accrues under the provisions
of this section shall become a part of the tax herein required to be paid.
(Ord. 1891: prior code § 2530.7).
Page 4
64-4.604 - Penalties and interest—Failure to collect and report.
If any operator shall negligently fail or wilfully refuse to collect the tax or to make, within the time
provided in this chapter, any report and remittance of the tax or any portion thereof required by this chapter,
the tax administrator shall proceed in such manner as he may deem best to obtain facts and information
on which to base his estimate of the tax due. As soon as the tax administrator shall procure such facts and
information as the assessment he is able to obtain upon which to base the assessment of any tax imposed
by this chapter and payable by any operator who has negligently failed or wilfully refused to collect the
same or to make such report and remittance, he shall proceed to determine and assess against such
operator the tax, interest and penalties provided for by this chapter. In case such determination is made,
the tax administrator shall give a notice of the amount so assessed by serving it personally or by depositing
it in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the operator so assessed at his last known place
of address. Such operator may within ten days after the serving or mailing of such notice make application
in writing to the tax administrator for a hearing on the amount assessed. If application by the operator for a
hearing is not made within the time prescribed, the tax, interest and penalties, if any, determined by the tax
administrator shall become final and conclusive and immediately due and payable. If such application is
made, the tax administrator shall give not less than five days' written notice in the manner prescribed herein
to the operator to show cause at a time and place fixed in the notice why the amount specified therein
should not be fixed for such tax, interest and penalties. At such hearing, the operator may appear and offer
evidence why such specified tax, interest and penalties should not be so fixed. After such hearing the tax
administrator shall determine the tax to be remitted and shall thereafter give written notice to the person in
the manner prescribed herein of such determination and the amount of such tax, interest and penalties.
The amount determined to be due shall be payable aft er fifteen days unless an appeal is taken as provided
in Section 64-4.606.
(Ord. 1891: prior code § 2530.8).
64-4.606 - Penalties and interest—Appeal.
Any operator aggrieved by any decision of the tax administrator with respect to the amount of such
tax, interest and penalties, if any, may appeal to the board of supervisors by filing a notice of appeal with
the county clerk within fifteen days of the serving or mailing of the determination of tax due. The board of
supervisors shall fix a time and place for hearing such appeal, and the county clerk shall give notice in
writing to such operator at his last known place of address. The findings of the board o f supervisors shall
be final and conclusive shall be served upon the appellant in the manner prescribed above for service of
notice of hearing. Any amount found to be due shall be immediately due and payable upon the service of
notice.
(Ord. 1891: prior code § 2530.5).
Article 64-4.8. Collection
64-4.802 - Collection—Records.
It is the duty of every operator liable for the collection and payment to the county of any tax imposed
by this chapter to keep and preserve, for a period of three years, all records as may he necessary to
determine the amount of such tax as he may have been liable for the collection of and payment to the
county, which records the tax administrator shall have the right to inspect at all reasonable times.
(Ord. 1891: prior code § 2530.10).
64-4.804 - Collection—Refunds—Claim filing required.
Page 5
Whenever the amount of any tax, interest or penalty has been overpaid or paid more than once or has
been erroneously or illegally collected or received by the county under this chapter it may be refunded as
provided in Sections 64-4.806 and 64-4.808, provided a claim in writing therefor, stating under penalty of
perjury the specific grounds upon which the claim is founded, is filed with the tax administrator within one
year of the date of payment. The claim shall be on forms furnished by the tax administrator.
(Ords. 96-5 § 1, 1891: prior code § 2530.11(a)).
64-4.806 - Collection—Refunds—Operator claims.
An operator may claim a refund or take as credit against taxes collected and remi tted the amount
overpaid, paid more than once or erroneously or illegally collected or received when it is established that
the person from whom the tax has been collected was not a transient; provided, however, that neither a
refund nor a credit shall be allowed unless the amount of the tax so collected has either been refunded to
the transient or credited to rent subsequently payable by the transient to the operator.
(Ord. 1891: prior code § 2530.11(b)).
64-4.808 - Collection Refunds—Transient claims.
A transient may obtain a refund of taxes overpaid or paid more than once or erroneously or illegally
collected or received by the county by filing a claim in the manner provided in Section 64 -4.804, but only
when the tax was paid by the transient directly to the tax administrator, or when the transient having paid
the tax to the operator, the operator has not obtained a refund or credit for such tax.
(Ord. 1891: prior code § 2530.11(c)).
64-4.810 - Collection—Refunds—Written record required.
No refund shall be paid under the provisions of Sections 64-4.804—64-4.810 unless the claimant
establishes his right thereto by written records showing entitlement thereto.
(Ord. 1891: prior code § 2530.11(d)).
64-4.812 - Collection—Actions.
Any tax required to be paid by any transient under the provisions of this chapter shall be deemed a
debt owned by the transient to the county. Any such tax collected by an operator which has not been paid
to the county shall be deemed a debt owed by the operator to the county. Any person owing money to the
county under the provisions of this chapter shall be liable to any action brought in the name of the county
for the recovery of such amount.
(Ord. 1891: prior code § 2530.12).
FINANCE COMMITTEE 5.
Meeting Date:08/16/2017
Subject:Immigrants Rights Program in Contra Costa
Submitted For: FINANCE COMMITTEE,
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: 5-9-17 D.7
Referral Name: Immigrants Rights
Presenter: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director Contact: Lisa Driscoll (925) 335-1023
Referral History:
On May 9, 2017, as part of the action to adopt the FY 2017/18 Recommended Budget, the Board
of Supervisors referred to the Finance Committee for review and consideration a proposal for
funding an immigrants rights program in Contra Costa.
The item was heard for the first time by the Finance Committee on June 26, 2017. Karen Mitchoff
requested that Ali Saidi give an update on the proposal under review and consideration for
funding an immigrants rights program in Contra Costa. Mr. Saidi thanked the Committee and
indicated the East Bay Community Foundation may give them funding for plan design. He had
recently attended a regional meeting on the topic and was excited about the possibility of forming
a new coalition alliance in Contra Costa. Mr. Saidi informed the Committee that program design
would take approximately thirty days to complete. Mr. Greg Colley of Catholics United for
Justice spoke in favor of a Contra Costa program. He said that his organization was aligned with
the Bishops to urge adoption of a program that aligns with the values of Catholic families. Debra
Bernstein of Monument Impact echoed Mr. Colley's comments. She stressed urgency and said that
funding a program was the most positive thing the County can do for the community. Supervisor
Mitchoff said that the County Board was concerned and sympathetic to this issue. She reminded
the audience that the Board had recently funded Contra Costa Cares by explaining how health
impacts the entire community. The Committee scheduled the next Finance Committee meeting for
August 16, 2017 at 2:00 to hear the updated proposal.
Referral Update:
The proposal prepared for the Finance Committee by the Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance
is Attachment A. The original proposal submitted to the Board of Supervisors on May 9, 2017 is
Attachment B.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
Accept report, and DIRECT staff regarding next steps.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
The proposal requests that the Board of Supervisors authorize the Office of the Public Defender to
establish Stand Together CoCo as a pilot project. The requested allocation is $500,000 in FY
17/18 funding to support operations in the January-June 2018 first phase, with a further
commitment that the County will provide $500,000 in annual support in each of fiscal years
2018-19 and 2019-20. Working with key local partners, Stand Together CoCo will then use this
commitment to generate funding from other public and private sources.
Attachments
Attachment A - Proposal for Stand Together CoCo
Attachment B - Original Proposal Submitted to Board of Supervisors on April 18
“The impact of deportation ripples outward,
creating a climate of fear and paralysis in the entire community –
children whose classmates are separated from their parents;
businesses who lose valued workers;
families who become scared to seek health care,
to use public services or even to drive.”i
Stand Together CoCo
One County, One Community, United
A Proposal Prepared for
the Finance Committee of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Submitted by The Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance, August 16, 2017
Report Written and Produced for CCIRA by Rebecca Brown, Reentry Solutions Group,
With support from the Y & H Soda Foundation
Attachment A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. 1
II. OUR REQUEST .............................................................................................................................................. 1
III. PROJECT DELIVERABLES ............................................................................................................................... 2
A. Community Workshops, Clinics, and Trainings ................................................................................................ 2
B. Public Education and Outreach ........................................................................................................................ 2
C. Community Raid Verification and Response .................................................................................................... 3
D. Representation in Immigration Proceedings .................................................................................................... 3
IV. PROJECT NEED ............................................................................................................................................. 3
V. PROJECT SCOPE AND IMPACT ....................................................................................................................... 5
VI. LOCAL PRECEDENTS ..................................................................................................................................... 7
VII. PROJECT RATIONALE .................................................................................................................................... 8
VIII. PROGRAMMATIC OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................................... 8
A. Immigration-Related Information and Raid Verification, Rapid Response Dispatch ....................................... 8
B. Legal Representation, Clinical Consultations, and Technical Assistance .......................................................... 9
C. Community Education and Legal Rights Workshops ...................................................................................... 10
IX. PROJECT GOVERNANCE .............................................................................................................................. 11
X. COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS: RFQS AND TIMELINE ..................................................................... 11
XI. ATTACHMENTS .......................................................................................................................................... 11
Attachment A
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance (CCIRA) proposes that Contra Costa County establish Stand Together
CoCo, a rapid response and community education project to support safety and justice for immigrant families in
Contra Costa.
The mission of Stand Together CoCo is to ensure that all people in Contra Costa County, regardless of citizenship or
immigration status, are afforded the rights established by the United States Constitution, and are protected from
actions or policies that result in disparate, discriminatory, or unlawful treatment.
A project conducted in partnership with community-based organizations to be selected through a competitive
process, Stand Together CoCo will provide culturally competent, no-cost rapid response support, legal defense
services and clinics, and immigrant rights education and training to support families impacted by anti-immigrant
policies and practices affecting Contra Costa County residents.
Stewarded by a multi-sector Steering Committee of local stakeholders, Stand Together CoCo will operate as a 2.5-
year pilot project managed by the Office of the Public Defender during its pilot period, spanning January 1, 2018 to
June 30, 2020.
Stand Together CoCo will launch its first phase from January 2018-June 2018, on a six-month budget of $573,557.
In this first phase, approximately 85% of all funds will be passed through to community-based organizations
selected via a competitive Request for Qualifications (RFQ) issued in October 2017, to provide community-based
training, support services, and legal representation. The Y & H Soda Foundation, which champions this effort, has
committed $75,000 to support the six-month first phase, contingent on a $500,000 contribution by Contra Costa
County to underwrite costs from Jan-June 2018.
As of the full fiscal year beginning July 1, 2018, the project will operate at an estimated annual budget of
$1,062,415. With the project in development during fall 2017 and in operation as of January 2018, Stand Together
CoCo will work with the Soda Foundation, other private funders, Contra Costa leaders, and allies to raise a target
of $560,000 in annual commitments from private sources, to augment proposed annual $500,000 grants made by
the County in each of the pilot’s three fiscal years.
As a public/private collective impact initiative staffed by trained community leaders and community-based
immigration defense attorneys, and deploying across the county’s three geographic regions, Stand Together CoCo
will build on Contra Costa’s outstanding record of success in developing bold and innovative solutions to advance
justice and equity for all of its residents.
II. OUR REQUEST
We ask the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to authorize the Office of the Public Defender to establish
Stand Together CoCo as a pilot project.
We further ask the Board of Supervisors to allocate $500,000 in FY 17/18 funding to support operations in the Jan-
June 2018 first phase, with a further commitment that the County will provide $500,000 in annual support in each
of fiscal years 2018-19 and 2019-20.
Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo, a Proposal by Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance, 8/16/17, page 2
Working with key local partners, Stand Together CoCo will then use this commitment to generate funding from
other public and private sources; we are already in conversation with leading regional funders that are eager to
support this work, pending commitment from County authorities.
III. PROJECT DELIVERABLES
In its first six months, the project will provide direct services conservatively valued at $626,900. Of course, this
direct-service value does not begin to calculate or reflect larger economic benefits garnered for individuals,
families, and Contra Costa County as a whole through the prevention of unnecessary detentions or improper
deportations. For a survey of these economic costs, see Sections IV and V below.
A. COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS, CLINICS, AND TRAININGS
• Workshops & Presentations: Conduct four workshops per region over the course of six months (on topics
such as Know Your Rights, Your Rights as a Tenant, and Protecting Your Employee Rights), reaching an
average of 45 people per workshop, totaling 540 people in the first six months (45 people at each of four
events per region for three regions); these events will also be live-streamed, conservatively reaching an
additional 500 people, thus serving a total of 1,040 people in six months, for a value conservatively
estimated at $26,000 ($25/per person, per workshop)
• In-reach to County jails: Provide or coordinate monthly informational presentations on due-process rights
and immigration processes and resources for people detained in the West County jail as ICE detainees,
reaching an estimated 30 people per month, reaching a total of 180 people in custody in the first six
months, for a value conservatively estimated at $9,000 (180 people @ $50/meeting)
• Clinical Consultations: Conduct Ask an Attorney/Case Review events, providing individualized legal
consultations, advising on legal rights and forms of relief, arranging structured and customized referrals
for pro-bono or low-cost legal services. An estimated 468 residents and families will receive free legal
consultations, for a value conservatively estimated at $140,400 (assuming six consultations per lawyer per
week for 26 weeks @ $300 per consultation)
• Train the Trainer/ Leadership Development: 12 stipended Community Responders will be trained in
relevant areas (e.g. group facilitation, participatory decision-making, and immigrant rights, deportation
procedures, community defense and education), and will lead monthly Local Leadership Council meetings
involving an additional 10 (volunteer) Peer Responders per region (both documented and
undocumented); each LLC will develop an Operating Agreement that outlines areas of responsibility and
duty, including shifts on dispatch and response (12 stipended Community Responders, at least 30
volunteer Peer Responders = 42 people), for a value conservatively estimated at $84,000 (42 people @
$2,000 in trainings)
B. PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
• Print materials: In first six months, produce 6,000 Know Your Rights cards which will include the Rapid
Response hotline number, in Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Persian, Arabic, Vietnamese, and Laotian; reprint,
as needed, in each of the subsequent years
Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo, a Proposal by Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance, 8/16/17, page 3
• Churches, mosques, radio, Univision: Conduct outreach and information interviews, and provide
informational materials and Know Your Rights cards, through at least 36 faith-based organizations in the
project’s first six months
• Provide single points of contact with at least 10 school districts across the county in the first six months,
to foster communication and enhance family capacity and preparedness to respond to immigration
enforcement concerns and actions
C. COMMUNITY RAID VERIFICATION AND RESPONSE
• One paid Community Response Coordinator, three paid Community Leaders, and 12 stipended
Community Responders, supported by 30 volunteer Peer Responders/Local Leadership Council members,
will staff a Rapid Response hotline 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to provide information, support,
and response for Contra Costa County residents who are threatened with deportation or who are
impacted by immigration enforcement activity.
D. REPRESENTATION IN IMMIGRATION PROCEEDINGS
• In the project’s first six months, provide legal representation for 60 detained individuals in pursuing bond
or release, or in removal defense and applications for relief at Executive Office of Immigration Review, for
a value conservatively estimated at $367,500 (at a blended value of $6,125/client for 60 clients)
IV. PROJECT NEED
The United States’ federal immigration enforcement and removal model has long relied on an array of community-
targeted tactics to identify, locate, detain, and deport non-citizen residents of the United States. These tactics
include large worksite raids, immigration-related interrogations for people held in state and local prisons and jails,
vehicle patrols canvassing certain communities, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) foot patrols to
target people going about their daily lives, such as in shops and workplaces, as well as at government sites such as
the DMV, social service agencies, and courthouses.
Under the new Presidential administration, such actions have dramatically broadened and intensified, developing
not only new tactics but expanding the net of targeted individuals. A recent federal memo issued by the
Department of Homeland Security instructs ICE agents to “take enforcement action against all removable aliens
encountered in the course of their duties,” whether or not they are an identified ICE target or have any criminal
history at all.ii At the same time, the federal government has formally adopted stricter policies against releasing
detainees pending their deportation process, thus “expanding detention space to support the E.O.’s termination
of ‘catch-and-release’ policies’” (Albanese, 2, emphasis added).
In the popular imagination, people detained by ICE have no legal basis or process by which to challenge their
deportation. But the fact of the matter is that all residents of the United States have constitutionally-protected
rights of due process. For example, immigrants detained by ICE are legally entitled to file an “application for relief,
to argue that the judge should let them stay in the country because of family and community ties, or because they
fear persecution abroad.”iii
Yet the effort to protect due process rights in immigration proceedings is a daunting task. As explained in a 2014
study by Northern California Collaborative for Immigrant Justice, “To stay in the United States with their families,
Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo, a Proposal by Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance, 8/16/17, page 4
immigrants detained in Northern California must navigate complex and intricate immigration laws and procedures”
(NJJIC, 10).
It is important to note that under current U.S. immigration laws and policies, people caught up in the deportation
system are not legally entitled to a lawyer if they cannot afford one – unless they can pay for a lawyer or find
someone to represent them for free, respondents in deportation proceedings must proceed without an attorney.
But it is almost impossible to traverse the complex deportation system without counsel – including counsel in the
very first moments of the detention and removal process. Custodial detention is a frightening and confusing
experience; decisions made in the intimidating confines of ICE custody – such as unknowingly signing away your
rights, or failing to request due process
like a bond hearing – can have
irreparable and lifelong effect. As
reported in a recent study in California,
for example, “the odds of being granted
bond [for release from detention] are
more than 3.5 times higher for
detainees represented by attorneys
than those who appeared pro se, net of
other relevant factors,” while “non-
detained and represented immigrants
succeeded approximately four times as
often as those who lacked counsel.”iv
Yet in San Francisco’s Immigration
Court, “roughly 2/3 of detained
immigrants had no legal representation at any point in their removal proceedings” (NCCIJ, 9). The financial barriers
are less daunting than the barriers to representation; the typical immigration bond nationally is slightly less than
$6,500.v
Lacking access to proper legal counsel, therefore, many thousands of people are detained and deported as the
result of missed due-process opportunities all along the way: due to failure to request or be awarded bond, or on
the basis of erroneous facts, or due to erroneous interpretation of facts, or resulting from improper application of
law, or without consideration of their potential relief from deportation related to their specific histories and
circumstances. And the judicial logjam is only growing: In fiscal year 2014, for instance, the eighteen immigration
judges of the San Francisco Immigration Court faced a backlog of 23,969 pending cases (NCCIJ, 12) – and this, it
should be noted, was before the advent of the new administration’s intensified policies.
What this means is that millions of people across America, and potentially tens of thousands of people in Contra
Costa, are subject to wrongful deportation – typically, due to lack of access to immediate counsel.
Given backlogs of this magnitude, it should come as no surprise that federal immigration judges recognize the
importance of legal representation for people in immigration proceedings. “In a recent survey of the nation’s
immigration judges, 92% of the judges agreed that ‘When the [immigrant] has a competent lawyer, I can conduct
the adjudication more efficiently and quickly.” In other words, representation “affects the efficiency of
adjudicative proceedings” (NCCIJ, 12).
Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo, a Proposal by Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance, 8/16/17, page 5
A recent data study estimated that there are 65,000 undocumented residents in Contra Costa,vi with Spanish,
Chinese, Tagalog, and Persian as the primary non-English languages spoken at home.vii These immigrants and their
families are essential elements of the vibrant mosaic that is Contra Costa County.
In the face of intensified federal immigration enforcement efforts, and in order to ensure due process while
supporting vulnerable communities, the Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance has spearheaded the creation of a
new initiative to support, advocate for, and protect Contra Costa’s vulnerable immigrant communities. Thus, and
with the active support of Contra Costa County’s elected leaders, Stand Together CoCo was born.
V. PROJECT SCOPE AND IMPACT
Immigrants – regardless of their immigration status – are, with their families, inextricably woven into California’s
history and fabric: in our economies, our neighborhoods, our businesses, and our schools.
It is imperative to realize that all non-citizen immigrants (including people who hold “green-cards”viii and visas,ix
and whether or not they have any criminal convictions or even arrests) are subject to the expanded federal policies
and actions now being implemented across the United States. According to an official memorandum dated
February 21, 2017, “DHS will no longer exempt classes or categories of removable aliens from potential
enforcement”; those who are prioritized for removal include
people who have “committed acts which constitute a
chargeable criminal offense” (whether or not they’ve been
arrested, charged, or convicted), have “abused any program
related to receipt of public benefits” (without clarifying the
standards of evidence for making such a claim), or “in the
judgment of an immigration officer, otherwise pose a risk to
public safety” (Albanese 2), thereby widening the net to
limitless expanse.
With this expansion and intensification of federal immigration
deportation efforts, it should come as no surprise that, within
Contra Costa as well as across our nation, community leaders and elected officials are developing new local
resources and solutions to mitigate deportation’s destructive effect on families, communities, and economies.
A wealth of researchx has made it clear: “The [detention or] deportation of a family’s breadwinner or primary
caregiver has devastating consequences for the spouse and children who depend on his earnings, including harm
to their financial, educational, physical, and mental wellbeing. Deportation of a parent can cause children to enter
the child welfare system, and result in children suffering lasting psychological harm that impacts their long-term
economic and social stability. These social and economic costs of deportation are largely borne by Northern
California's counties, which administer public health, education, and social services” (NCCIJ, 7, emphasis added).
In addition to the severe local economic and social impacts of deportation, a recent report asserts that each
deportation by ICE costs taxpayers an average of $10,874.xi
Blended-Status Families: Many non-citizens are members of “blended status” families, in which one parent, or all
of the children, may be United States citizens. Across the state, the “vast majority of children…are U.S. citizens (96
percent), a small amount (2 percent) are lawfully residing immigrants, and very few children (2 percent) are
undocumented immigrants.xii
Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo, a Proposal by Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance, 8/16/17, page 6
Locally, blended families include children who are legal citizens; “While only 1 in 14 children [in Alameda and
Contra Costa Counties] is an immigrant, nearly half have at least one immigrant parent, and 30% of households are
headed by immigrant[s]…. [E]stimates suggest that 72% of unauthorized residents…are living with citizens, and
34% are living with their own citizen children.”xiii
Thus, although deportation focuses on individuals, its effects ripple with substantial consequence across their
families, and thus across our broader community.
Children’s Well-Being: Children are especially vulnerable to the detrimental effects of a hostile immigration
enforcement environment: “Although undocumented immigrant parents may try to protect their children from
adults’ worries, children are highly cognizant of the implications of immigration status on their everyday lives. Even
if family members are not actually detained or deported, immigrant families live in constant fear of being
separated from loved ones that keeps
them from fully participating in American
society,” such as going to the doctor,
driving a child to school, or visiting public
places like parks (Effect, 2).
Multiple studies confirm that a parent’s
detention or deportation increases
depression and anxiety in children,
negatively affects physical health and
school performance, decreases family
income, increases housing and food
insecurity, and increases risk of child-
welfare involvement (Effect, 2). Further,
many immigrant parents of children
citizens hesitate to apply for essential public benefits to which their children are entitled – such as Medi-Cal – out
of fear of navigating the systems or that the information may be used against them (Effect, 3).
Further, an estimated 12,000 young people in Contra Costa Countyxiv are eligible for administrative relief from
deportation under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program,xv which is now being threatened
under President Trump’s administration.
And when children miss school, our local school districts lose federal and state funding tied to Average Daily
Attendance rates, while parents may be required to appear at truancy court proceedings; further, when individuals
are afraid to engage with authorities, they may be unwilling to report crimes, whether as a victim or a witness,
thus diminishing public safety overall.
Economy: Notwithstanding divisive rhetoric claiming that undocumented immigrants are a drain on the economy,
a study by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy found that undocumented immigrants “collectively
contribute an estimated $11.74 billion to state and local coffers each year via a combination of sales and excise,
personal income, and property taxes…. On average, the nation’s estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants
pay 8 percent of their incomes in state and local taxes every year.”xvi
The vast majority of undocumented immigrants hold wage-earning jobs,xvii with workforce participation rates
higher than those of non-citizens.xviii A recent paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found
that “the economic contribution of unauthorized workers to the U.S. economy is substantial, at approximately 3%
Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo, a Proposal by Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance, 8/16/17, page 7
of private-sector GDP annually, which amounts to close to $5 trillion over a 10-year period”; the paper further
found that “legalization of unauthorized workers would increase their contribution to 3.6% of private-sector GDP.
The source of these gains stems from the productivity increase arising from the expanded labor market
opportunities for these workers which, in turn, would lead to an increase in capital investment by employers.”xix
These macroeconomic effects prove true at the microeconomic level of individual families, as well -
“[I]mmigration-related arrests cause household income
to fall to half on average, and leave one-fourth of
households without anyone earning wages…. The Urban
Institute’s 2010 study of families of detainees found that
28.3% of families suffered from insufficient food access
after six months” (NCCIJ 13). Yet people can be held in
detention for many months; according to one survey of
people detained in ICE custody for at least six months,
the average length of detention was 273 days; of these
people, 90% had been employed immediately prior to
detention, with collective wages lost to families and the
local economies calculated at more than $11 million (CA
Due Process Crisis, 10-11).
And for every person who has lost a job, there’s an
employer who has lost an employee. “[W]hen employees are detained or deported, businesses must bear the
costs of this turnover. A review of 30 previous studies of turnover costs showed that these costs are regularly 20
percent of annual wages for workers earning less than $50,000…. Deportation and detention-related employee
turnover thus places a huge financial burden on California employers, especially given that noncitizens comprise
such a large proportion of California’s workforce” (CA Due Process, 11).
And the ripples widen: for every family that has lost one parent, there’s another parent (or relative or friend or
child) who must shoulder additional demands, which in turn affects their own abilities to go to work, or school, or
care for their families.
VI. LOCAL PRECEDENTS
Contra Costa County has both proven and recent experience in undertaking successful pilot initiatives to develop
new approaches to meet urgent needs that require coordinated responses. In the County’s history, these
initiatives are typically conceived as time-limited, cross-agency demonstration pilot projects that leverage
established infrastructure and are supported by dedicated public funding sufficient to test these new solutions.
Local examples of Contra Costa’s commitment to innovative pilot projects include the County’s new Office of
Reentry and Justice, originally proposed in May 2016 by the AB109 Community Advisory Board and now a pilot
initiative operating inside the County Administrator’s Office; the Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence initiative
(now known as Families Thrive), established at the direction of the County Board of Supervisors and housed within
the Employment and Human Services division; and the Family Justice Alliance, which began as a cross-sector,
community-based pilot and is now an independent 501c3 organization operating in partnership with public and
private agencies and our County Board of Supervisors.
Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo, a Proposal by Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance, 8/16/17, page 8
Further, Stand Together CoCo will build on Contra Costa’s commitment to bold, coordinated, public/private
solutions – such as Contra Costa CARES – developed to meet the distinct needs of undocumented Contra Costa
residents. Launched as a twelve-month pilot in November 2015, Contra Costa CARES continues operating today,
providing access to essential primary medical care for low-income adult undocumented residents. The CARES
project was launched with $1 million in initial funding, of which Contra Costa County provided $500,000. Today,
the project operates on an annual budget of $1.5 million for fiscal 2017-18.
Taken as a whole, these initiatives came into being as the result of forward-thinking partnerships of community
stakeholders, the County Board of Supervisors, and public and private agencies. Each of them reflects Contra
Costa’s demonstrated commitment to acknowledging and meeting the urgent challenges confronting some of our
most vulnerable and marginalized community members.
The proposed project, Stand Together CoCo, builds on this legacy of extraordinary leadership and partnership.
VII. PROJECT RATIONALE
As an interdisciplinary, multi-sector initiative, Stand Together CoCo is designed to maximize the value of each
element while augmenting collective capacity through intentional synergies.
• Grounded in community-based leadership development, capacity building, and community
empowerment, Stand Together CoCo elicits, values, and enhances grassroots expertise, cultivates
established and emergent community leaders, and advances community empowerment and agency.
• Partnering with experienced, established nonprofit organizations and legal service providers with deep
ties to affected communities will advance trust and acceptance, while stewarding funds and augmenting
capacity in the most cost-effective manner possible.
• Placing the project inside the Public Defender’s Office will ensure a level of expertise, capacity, and
visibility that will foster both excellence and accountability.
• The project’s endorsement by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors will send a clear message of
leadership, commitment, and compassion for our most vulnerable residents – and their allies – who are
confronting terrifying new realities.
VIII. PROGRAMMATIC OVERVIEW
Stewarded by a Steering Committee and informed by regional Local Leadership Councils in each of the County’s
three geographic regions, Stand Together CoCo will provide three essential functions:
A. IMMIGRATION-RELATED INFORMATION AND RAID VERIFICATION, RAPID RESPONSE
DISPATCH
Supported by a 24-hour Stand Together hotline built on an established web-based platform and augmented by an
on-demand multi-language translation service, regional teams of trained Stand Together Community Leaders,
stipended Community Responders, and volunteer Peer Responders will be dispatched to accomplish three goals:
Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo, a Proposal by Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance, 8/16/17, page 9
1. Verify and provide accurate information about immigration-related actions reported in the
community, in order to dispel inaccurate information while concentrating attention and resources in
response to actions undertaken by agents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
2. Serve as trained Legal Observers to witness and document actions being undertaken by ICE in Contra
Costa
3. Provide immediate support and systems navigation for families and individuals in Contra Costa who
have been targeted by/detained by ICE
B. LEGAL REPRESENTATION, CLINICAL CONSULTATIONS, AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
1. Rapid Response Legal Representation
Alerted by the Stand Together Dispatch, and in partnership with Community Leaders, a team of experienced
immigration defense attorneys will provide Contra Costa residents with rapid-response legal representation at
three critical moments in the deportation process:
• During the determination of eligibility for release from detention on bond
• During the judicial process to address or challenge grounds for deportation
• During the judicial process to determine eligibility for relief from deportation
2. Community-Based Clinical Consultations
The impact and consequence of the lack of access to legal services extends beyond the question of custody and
bond, spilling into everyday life for non-detained immigrants and their families, as well. In the absence of reliable
and accessible legal advice about rights and risks, thousands of families are trapped in the shadows, afraid to seek
help or counsel.
This chronic condition – the lack of personal financial resources and uncertainty about who they can trust – is
further exacerbated by the relatively limited pool of qualified immigration removal defense attorneys in Contra
Costa County.
Thus, Stand Together CoCo, and its partners, will design and conduct community events to offer legal consultations
and services. As part of this work, Stand Together CoCo lawyers will provide structured referrals to relevant
nonprofit and public services to help address those needs. Such customized consultations will ensure that all
Contra Costa residents have access to legal advice regarding the options and issues specific to each case and
circumstances.
Conducted in partnership with existing community-based initiatives, these events will maximize the breadth and
value of complementary resources such as the County’s Clean Slate/Prop 47/Prop 64 legal remedies projects.
By embedding multi-partner “one stop” immigrant-resource events in trusted community-based settings, Stand
Together CoCo will mitigate some of the most challenging barriers currently faced by these vulnerable residents –
knowing where to start and how to get help.
Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo, a Proposal by Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance, 8/16/17, page 10
3. Technical Assistance
In addition to providing direct representation and clinical services, the Stand Together CoCo attorneys will also
provide community partners with technical assistance regarding new or complex developments of immigration
law. To advance collective capacity, they will provide issues analysis on relevant developments in immigration law;
provide training and job-shadowing opportunities to help Community Leaders and Responders understand the
methods and procedures of immigration court; and review and assist in the development of content for legal rights
workshops, such as those described below.
C. COMMUNITY EDUCATION AND LEGAL RIGHTS WORKSHOPS
Working in partnership with proven community-based partners, the multi-disciplinary Stand Together CoCo team
will organize an ongoing array of culturally-responsive Community Education and Legal Services workshops, clinics,
and trainings held in safe, trusted community-based sites across Contra Costa County.
Developed by Stand Together Community Leaders and Stand Together lawyers, and supported by stipended
Community Responders and volunteer Peer Responders, these events will serve three primary functions:
1. Workshops: Advance equity, strengthen collective purpose, and equip Contra Costa families and
individuals with essential tools and information to protect their families and exercise their Constitutional
rights, which apply to all residents of the United States, regardless of their citizenship status
Hands-on workshops will help families prepare and equip themselves for potential targeting by ICE, offering
practical and user-friendly guidance on topics such as: Let’s Make a Family Preparedness Plan; Know Your Rights;
Know Your Immigration-Status Options; What To Do if ICE Approaches You; Tenant Rights; and Employee Rights
(including wage theft)
2. Train the Trainer Capacity-Building: Expand both individual and collective capacity to advance safety and
justice for immigrant families in Contra Costa
In the Train the Trainer events, project staff will advance community capacity through technical trainings such as
“Raid Verification Protocols,” “Navigating the Immigration Bond Process,” “Developing Family Preparedness
Plans,” and “How to be a Safe and Effective Legal Observer.”
These events will also be co-convened with relevant partners and projects in order to maximize the reach and
impact of existing community-based legal efforts, such as the County’s Misdemeanor Early Representation Project,
which is piloting to great success in both Antioch and Richmond.
3. Leadership Development: Create a structured continuum of development and leadership opportunities to
identify, recruit, invest in, and organize an array of impacted community members.
At initial scale, this continuum will be led by three Community Leaders (paid, full-time) who will cultivate and work
with twelve Local Responders (stipended, part-time), who will in turn provide engagement opportunities for an
estimated 30-36 Local Leadership Council members (volunteers from impacted communities in each of the three
geographic regions).
Facilitated by each region’s Community Leaders and Local Responders, the Local Leadership Councils will provide
safe and accessible methods to share essential information directly with and from the affected communities.
Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo, a Proposal by Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance, 8/16/17, page 11
IX. PROJECT GOVERNANCE
Hosted by the Office of the Public Defender during its pilot phase, Stand
Together CoCo will be administratively managed by Deputy Public
Defender/Immigration Attorney Ali Saidi, in stewardship with a multi-
stakeholder Steering Committee representing public agencies, nonprofit
organizations, and community members.
To augment and inform the work of this body, the three regional Community
Response Leaders will organize and manage Local Leadership Councils in each
region. Co-facilitated by the Community Response Leaders and each region’s
stipended Community Responders, these Local Leadership Councils will provide
structured opportunities to gather and disseminate information, identify areas
of local concern, recruit and train volunteer responders, provide mutual
support in what can be an isolating and terrifying environment, and inform
project design and operations.
This governance structure – Host, Steering Committee, and Local Leadership
Councils – encourages shared leadership, aligns public and community
resources, and cultivates regional insights and meaningful peer-leadership
development opportunities
X. COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS: RFQS AND TIMELINE
In its pilot phase, the project will be hosted at the Office of the Public Defender, which will provide in-kind
occupancy and indirect resources to supervise the project. Under the umbrella of the Public Defender’s Office, the
bulk of the project’s day-to-day activities will be undertaken by community-based organizations selected via a
competitive Request for Qualifications (RFQ) process.
The RFQ process will be managed by an RFQ Team, which will include representatives of the Public Defender’s
Office, County leadership, and community members with expertise in the immigrant experience, community-based
service delivery, community organizing, and immigration defense.
We propose the following timeline:
• Tuesday, September 12, 2017: Board of Supervisors approves Stand Together CoCo and commits funding
• By Friday, October 20, 2017: Assemble an RFQ Team, develop a Request for Qualifications, prepare for
dissemination (pending approval/authorization by the Board of Supervisors)
• By Friday, November 10, 2017: Receive and vet responses, select proposed grantees
• On Tuesday, November 14, 2017: Present recommendations to Board of Supervisors
• By Monday, December 11, 2017: Finalize contracts
• By Friday, December 29, 2017: Develop basic policy documents and operating agreements
• Tuesday, January 2, 2018: Begin operations
XI. ATTACHMENTS
See attached Gantt chart, organizational chart, budget, and infographic for additional information.
Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo, a Proposal by Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance, 8/16/17, page 12
i Family Unity, Family Health: How Family-Focused Immigration Reform Will Mean Better Health for Children and Families,
Human Impact Partners, June 2013, Foreword.
ii Albanese, Matthew T., Memorandum Implementing the President’s Border Security and Interior Immigration Enforcement
Policies, February 21, 2017, page 1, accessed at
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3889695/doc00801320170630123624.pdf
iii Access to Justice for Immigrant Families and Communities, Northern California Collaborative for Immigrant Justice, October
2014, page 19; hereafter NCCIJ.
iv California’s Due Process Crisis: Access to Legal Counsel for Detained Immigrants, The California Coalition for Universal
Representation,” June 2016.
v https://www.immigrantbailfund.org
vi National and County Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population, 2010-14, Migration Policy Institute,
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-daca-profiles
vii http://statisticalatlas.com/county/California/Contra-Costa-County/Languages
viii https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Green%20Card/GreenCard_Comparison_EN.PDF
ix https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/immigration-terms-and-definitions-involving-aliens
x Satinsky, Sara, et al., Family Unity, Family Health: How Family-Focused Immigration Reform Will Mean
Better Health for Children and Families, Human Impact Partners, June 2013, available at http://
www.familyunityfamilyhealth.org/uploads/images/FamilyUnityFamilyHealth.pdf at 8
xi Blanco, Octavio, How Much It Costs ICE to Deport an Undocumented Immigrant, CNN, April 13, 2017,
http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/13/news/economy/deportation-costs-undocumented-immigrant/index.html
xii The Effect of Hostile Immigration Policies on Children’s Mental Health, The Children’s Partnership: California Immigrant Policy
Center, March 2017, page 1.
xiii Pastor, Manuel, et al., California Immigrant Education Scorecard, Center for the Study of Immigrant Integration, University of
Southern California, September 2012, page 5.
xiv County Level Information on Undocumented Population, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Data Tools, Migration
Policy Institute, http://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-daca-profiles
xv “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is a kind of administrative relief from deportation. The purpose of DACA is to
protect eligible immigrant youth who came to the United States when they were children from deportation. DACA gives young
undocumented immigrants: 1) protection from deportation, and 2) a work permit. The program expires after two years, subject
to renewal.” Source: Undocumented Student Program, University of California at Berkeley, https://undocu.berkeley.edu/legal-
support-overview/what-is-daca/
xvi Undocumented Immigrants’ State and Local Tax Contributions, Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, March 2, 2017,
https://itep.org/immigration/
xvii Profile of the Unauthorized Population: United States, Migration Policy Institute, Data Hub. MPI’s estimates are based on
analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data from the 2014 American Community Survey (ACS), 2010-2014 ACS pooled, and the 2008
Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), available at http://www.migrationpolicy.org/ data/unauthorized-
immigrant-population/state/US.
xviii The Effect of Hostile Immigration Policies on Children’s Mental Health, The Children’s Partnership: California Immigrant
Policy Center, March 2017, page 2.
xix Edwards, Ryan, and Francesc Ortega, The Economic Contribution of Unauthorized Workers: An Industry Analysis, National
Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 22834, Issued November 2016.
Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo, Budget
Annual cost
per FTE
FTE on
project
Year 1
(FY17-18)
(6 months)
Year 2
(FY18-19)
Year 3
(FY19-20)
Costs
Host
Project Director Ali Saidi (provided in-kind by Public Defender)-$ 0.20 -$ -$ -$
Administrative Analyst-Project APW1 ($50K + 50% benefits)75,000$ 1.00 37,500$ 75,000$ 75,000$
Team/Council meeting costs @ 1 meeting /region/month for 3 regions @ $75/meeting 1,350$ 2,700$ 2,700$
Community Education and Legal Rights Workshops and Clinics: One/region/quarter, @ $750 ea 4,500$ 9,000$ 9,000$
Translation equipment 1,500$ -$ -$
Website design and ongoing TA 15,000$ 1,200$ 1,200$
Hotline infrastructure @ $50/month plus one-time set-up fee of $10,000 10,300$ 600$ 600$
Technical assistance (implementation/operations support)18,000$ 7,500$ -$
Costs for Host 1.20 88,150$ 96,000$ 88,500$
Stand Together Community Team
Stand Together Coordinator @ $60K plus benefits 60,000$ 1.00 30,000$ 60,000$ 60,000$
Community Leaders @ $40K plus benefits 40,000$ 3.00 60,000$ 120,000$ 120,000$
Project Assistant @ $32K plus benefits 32,000$ 0.50 8,000$ 16,000$ 16,000$
Benefits 22%21,560$ 43,120$ 43,120$
Local Responders (12 people, 4 per region, each at .5 FTE, stipended, $14/hr)28,000$ 6.00 84,000$ 168,000$ 168,000$
Print materials @ $1,500 for Spanish, and $500 per language in the top six languages 4,500$ 5,000$ 5,000$
Cell phones (per FTE, @ $50/ FTE /month 3,150$ 6,300$ 6,300$
Local mileage for Community Action Unit @ 250 miles/month/FTE @ $.535/mile 8,426$ 16,853$ 16,853$
Indirect @ 10% of all program costs 10%21,964$ 43,527$ 43,527$
Costs for Community Action Unit 10.50 241,600$ 478,800$ 478,800$
Legal Services
Senior Attorney/Legal Services Coordinator @ $120K plus benefits 120,000$ 1.00 60,000$ 120,000$ 120,000$
Staff Attorney @ $92K plus benefits 92,000$ 2.00 92,000$ 184,000$ 184,000$
Legal Services Team assistant @ $32K plus benefits 32,000$ 0.50 8,000$ 16,000$ 16,000$
Benefits @ 25%22%33,440$ 66,880$ 66,880$
Cell phones @ $50/FTE/month (2 in Year 1, 3 in subsequent years)1,050$ 2,100$ 2,100$
Document translation costs 2,500$ 5,000$ 5,000$
Local mileage for Attorneys @ 200 miles/month/FTE @ $.535/mile (2 in Yr 1, 3 after)1,926$ 3,852$ 4,494$
Indirect @ 10% of all program costs (excluding consultants and non-recurring costs)10%19,892$ 39,783$ 39,847$
Costs for Legal Services Unit 3.50 218,808$ 437,615$ 438,321$
Flexible legal defense funds/litigation expenses including expert witnesses (assumes $1,250/case for 40 cases/year)25,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$
Total Operating Costs 573,557$ 1,062,415$ 1,055,621$ Stand Together CoCo, 8/16/17, Attachments Page 1Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo, Timeline, as of August 8, 2017 Q3 2017 Q4 2017 Q1 2018 Q2 2018 Q3 2018 Q4 2018 Q1 2019 Q2 2019
Administrative Processes
Receive project approval and funding appropriation from CoCo Board of Supervisors x
Complete internal County processes to establish the project within Public Defenders Office x
Hire Project Legal/Admin Assistant x
Launch Team
Establish and convene Launch Team x
Develop initial Team charter, governance and decision-making rules x x
Review, finalize, and approve budgets for RFQ services x
Convene RFQ Team, outline RFQ process and timeline x
Draft and approve RFQ x
Submit RFQ to County for approval x
Release RFQ, review responses, make funding recommendations x
Submit funding recommendations through County processes (PPC? Counsel? CAO? BOS?)x
Execute contracts x
Develop and document operating protocols x x
Begin implementing project activities x
Technical
Identify hotline provider, negotiate scope and costs x x
Identify need/function for website, social media technical assistance x x
Identify translation resources (language, equipment)x x
Identify needs for training, identify providers and costs x x
Identify method for text-messaging, identify provider and cost x x
Identify information management platform and protocols x x
Implement data system, website, and hotline platforms x x
Steering Committee
Draft Steering Committee charter and composition x
Conduct outreach and recruitment for the Steering Committee x
Convene and orient the Steering Committee x
Develop MOUs (incl privacy, data-management and reporting, and data-sharing agreeements)x x
Review and approve community-responder training needs, curriculum x x
Hold quarterly Steering Committee meetings x x x x x x
Conduct mid-course project reviews x x
Local Leadership Councils
Develop Local Leadership Council charters, composition x x
Recruit and convene LLC in each region x
Conduct monthly LLCs in each region x x x x xStand Together CoCo, 8/16/17, Attachments Page 2Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo: One County, One Community, Together
A rapid response and community capacity-building project to support safety and justice
for non-citizen individuals and families in Contra Costa County
Office of the Public
Defender
.2 FTE Immigration Attorney
1 FTE Admin Analyst
Community Response
Hub
1 FTE Coordinator
.5 FTE Project Assistant
Community Response
Team West
1 FTE Community Response Leader
4 (.5 FTE) Local Responders (2.0 FTE total)
Leadership Council West
10-12 volunteer Peer Responders, documented or not,
organized by Community Leader and Local Responders
Community Response
Team Central
1 FTE Community Response Leader
4 (.5 FTE) Local Responders (2.0 FTE total)
Leadership Council Central
10-12 volunteer Peer Responders, documented or not,
organized by Community Leader and Local Responders
Community Response
Team East
1 FTE Community Leader
4 (.5 FTE) Local Responders (2.0 FTE total)
Leadership Council East
10-12 volunteer Peer Responders, documented or not,
organized by Community Leader and Local Responders
Legal Response Team
1 FTE Senior Attorney/Coordinator
2 FTE Staff Attorneys
.5 FTE Project Assistant
Stewardship
Council
Public/ private stakeholders
Stand Together CoCo, 8/16/17, Attachments Page 3Attachment A
Stand Together CoCo: One County, One Community, United
Stand Together CoCo
Community Responders
Stand Together CoCo
Community Leaders
Stand Together CoCo
Community Lawyers
Stand Together CoCo
Hotline/Info Team
•Observe and Witness: Organized, trained, and supported by
Community Leaders, serve as legal observers to ICE activities
•Accompany and Support: Assist family members to navigate
bond processes, gather defense-related information for
lawyers
•Recruit, organize and manage teams of Community
Responders
•Organize and conduct community events and clinics, with
lawyers and community responders
•Provide rapid-response bond representation for people in
ICE detention
•Provide representation for deportation eligibility and
eligibility for relief
•Conduct community events and clinics, with Community
Leaders and Community Responders
•Receive and confirm info on ICE enforcement activities
•Deploy Community Leaders to verify and respond to
enforcement activities
•Align and coordinate resources and information with other
immigrant networksStand Together CoCo, 8/16/17, Attachments Page 4Attachment A
ONE EVENT CAN HAVE MANY CONSEQUENCES
Elise’s cousins are
stretched thin and
overcrowded with three
new family members,
their household goes from
four to seven overnight.*
*Nina and Ben were lucky to
have two parents present.
At any given moment 5,000
foster care children are
children of deported parents.
Nina and Ben switch schools suddenly
because of the move. They feel abandoned
and isolated in their new environment.
Nina and Ben’s friends and former class-
mates hear of the deportation, become
fearful and miss days of school.
afraid to use parks
and exercise outdoors,
People are afraid to drive,afraid to use public
services like clinics
and afraid to get involved
in their communities.
DEPORTAT ION POLICY CREATES A CLIMATE OF FEAR AND PA RALY SIS IN COMMUNITIES.
BUT, THEN ONE DAY . . .
SO...
AND...
THE GARCIAS ARE A PA RT OF THEIR COMMUNITY
Their children, Nina and
Ben go to grade school
in town.
Jorge works at a factory.
Elise is a teacher.
Elise buys food and
clothing at the local store.
$$$
He pays rent to a landlord. They volunteer with
their local church.
Jorge Garcia is an undocumented resident of the U.S. He came here in search of a better life. He lives with his partner Elise,
a U.S. citizen. Because Jorge entered the country without documentation he cannot gain status through marriage.
He is eventually deported,
never to return.
Employers lose experienced workers.
Families lose income. Landlords lose
tenants. Storeowners lose revenue.
The small town starts to lose its tax
base, people begin to leave and the
town’s economic activity declines.
Jorge stops coming to work. Other
workers are afraid they might get picked
up. Some stop coming to work too.
Without the support of Jorge’s income, Elise cannot
afford the rent. She is evicted and moves in with
cousins who live in a different town. The psychological
strain is enormous because she is financially strained
and her kids have become despondent and worried.
$$$
Jorge is pulled over for having a
broken taillight. The police realize he
doesn't have papers and he is arrested.
He is detained for several months
in an out-of-state prison.
Source: Family Unity, Family Health: How Family-Focused Immigration Reform Will Mean Better Health for Children and Families,
Human Impact Partners, June 2013
Attachment A
Attachment A
Attachment A
Attachment A
Attachment A
Attachment A
Attachment A