Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 04132015 - Internal Ops Cte Min            INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE April 13, 2015 2:30 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. RECEIVE and APPROVE the Record of Action for the March 9, 2015 IOC meeting. (Julie DiMaggio Enea, IOC Staff)   4. APPROVE the nomination of Peter Dragovich to the Environmental #2 Alternate seat on the Hazardous Materials Commission to complete the unexpired term ending on December 31, 2015 and to a new term ending on December 31, 2019. (Michael Kent, Hazardous Materials Ombudsman)   5. CONDUCT interviews for the Board of Supervisors Appointee 1 and 2 seats on the Airport Land Use Commission and CONSIDER determining recommendations for Board of Supervisors consideration. (Jamar Stamps, Conservation and Development Department)   6. CONDUCT interviews of the candidates for two impartial observers and one evaluator of the Three-Day Ambulance Service RFP (Request for Proposals) scoring process and DETERMINE recommendations for consideration by the Board of Supervisors. (Julie DiMaggio Enea, IOC Staff)   7. CONSIDER approving recommendations from the Fish & Wildlife Committee for allocation of 2015 Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund Grant funds for 11 projects totaling $61,155. (Maureen Parkes, Conservation and Development Department)   8. CONSIDER recommendations within the Economic Development and Infrastructure/Public Facilities Categories of the Community Development Block Grant. (Gabriel Lemus, Conservation and Development Department)   9. ACCEPT report on the status of the development of a waste hauler ordinance. (Marilyn 1 9. ACCEPT report on the status of the development of a waste hauler ordinance. (Marilyn Underwood, Environmental Health Director)   10. ACCEPT the triennial review and report from the County Administrator/Clerk of the Board's Office on 16 of the Board's advisory bodies and APPROVE the recommendations of staff. (Terry Speiker, Chief Asst. County Administrator)   11.The next meeting is currently scheduled for May 11, 2015.   12.Adjourn   The Internal Operations Committee will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend Internal Operations 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 Internal Operations 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: Julie DiMaggio Enea, Committee Staff Phone (925) 335-1077, Fax (925) 646-1353 julie.enea@cao.cccounty.us 2 INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE 3. Meeting Date:04/13/2015   Subject:RECORD OF ACTION FOR THE MARCH 9, 2015 IOC MEETING Submitted For: David Twa, County Administrator  Department:County Administrator Referral No.: N/A   Referral Name: RECORD OF ACTION  Presenter: Julie DiMaggio Enea, IOC Staff Contact: Julie DiMaggio Enea (925) 335-1077 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 decisions made in the meeting. Referral Update: Attached is the Record of Action for the March 9, 2015 IOC meeting. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): RECEIVE and APPROVE the Record of Action for the March 9, 2015 IOC meeting. Fiscal Impact (if any): None. Attachments Record of Action for 3/9/15 Internal Operations Committee Meeting 3 INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE March 9, 2015 2:30 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   Present: Karen Mitchoff, Chair; John Gioia, Vice Chair  Staff Present:Julie DiMaggio Enea, Staff  Attendees: Jason Crapo, County Building Official  Kate Bieker, Contra Costa Superior Court  Keith Freitas, Airports Manager  Cynthia Belon, Behavior Health Director  Warren Hayes, Health Services Dept.  Jamar Stamps, DCD  Lindy Lavender, District IV Supervisor's Office  Jill Ray, District II Supervisor's Office  Maurice Gunderson  Charles Kreling  Charles Madison  Candace Pereira  Patricia Mantelli Bristow  Stan Baraghin  Connie Spears  Janet Marshall Wilson  Tom Weber, Aviation Advisory Cte  Tyra Wright. CC Assoc of Realtors  Carla Weston, CC Assoc of Realtors  Nick Solis, CC Assoc of Realtors  Fred Weston, CC Assoc of Realtors  Lauren Rettagliata, Mental Health Commission  Theresa Pasquini, Mental Health Commission  Matt Turville, Del Sol Energy  Robert Rogers, District I Supervisor's Office  Heather Schiffman, CC Assoc of Realtors  Lea Bristol, District IV Supervisor's Office  Sharon Madison  Jonathan Kevles, CA First Program Administrator  Eva Perez, HERO Program  4 Steve Padburg, Solar Universe  Brandon Wilkers  Josh Aldrich, Del Sol Energy                   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).    No public comment was offered.   a.CONSIDER approving Record of Action for the February 9, 2015 IOC Meeting, as posted on the County Website.    The Record of Action for the February 9, 2015 Internal Operations Committee meeting, attached hereto, was approved as published on the County website.    AYE: Chair Karen Mitchoff, Vice Chair John Gioia  Passed   Attachments:  IOC Record of Action for 2/9/15 3.APPROVE nomination of Patricia Mantelli Bristow (Byron) to the County seat on the Contra Costa Transportation Authority Citizens Advisory Committee to a four-year term ending on March 31, 2019.       The Committee approved the nomination of Patricia Mantelli Bristow to the County seat on the Contra Costa Transportation Authority Citizens Advisory Committee to a four-year term ending on March 31, 2019 and directed staff to forward the Committee's recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.    AYE: Chair Karen Mitchoff, Vice Chair John Gioia  Passed   Attachments:  DCD Recruitment Material for CCTA CAC  Candidate Application_CCTACAC_Patricia Mantelli Bristow 4.INTERVIEW four candidates and DETERMINE nomination for the At Large #1 seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee, for a three-year term ending on February 28, 2018.       Candidates Elizabeth Clough and Gary Olsen did not appear for the interview. The Committee interviewed candidates Maurice Gunderson and Charles Kreling, and decided to recommend the appointment of Maurice Gunderson to the At Large #1 seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee to a three-year term ending on February 28, 2018, and directed staff to forward its recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.   5    AYE: Chair Karen Mitchoff, Vice Chair John Gioia  Passed   Attachments:  Candidate Application_Elizabeth Clough_AAC  Candidate Application_Maurice Gunderson_AAC  Candidate Application_Charles Kreling_AAC  Resume_Charles Kreling  Candidate Application_Gary Olsen_AAC 5.The potentially significant environmental and economic benefits of PACE financing suggest the County may want to consider participating in such programs. However, ongoing efforts by FHFA to discourage mortgage lending on residential properties with PACE loans requires that the County act prudently in considering the formation and operation of PACE financing districts.  Should the Board decide to permit PACE financing within the county unincorporated area, each proposal to form a PACE district should be evaluated by County staff to ensure the benefits of PACE financing can be made available while also protecting the interests of the County and the public. Factors such as a PACE program's participation in the State's Loss Reserve Program, disclosure of potential negative impacts to participating property owners resulting from federal regulatory action, and agreement to release the County from liability associated with operation of the program should all be considered as preferred program elements. To this end, we recommend that entities interested in forming PACE financing districts within the unincorporated area of the county submit an application with their proposal to the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD), which will serve as the central point of contact for applicants and would work closely with other County departments, including County Counsel, the County Auditor-Controller and the County Treasurer Tax-Collector, in the review of applications. Following a satisfactory review of application materials, staff would proceed to develop contracts with program providers to operate PACE programs within the county. Such contracts would be developed in consultation with County Counsel and would include terms requiring that program providers participate in the State’s PACE Loss Reserve Program, disclose potential mortgage risk to borrowers resulting from federal regulatory actions, and indemnify the County from claims that may arise from operation of PACE programs within the county. Other conditions may also apply based on staff review of application materials. Following successful negotiation of contracts with PACE providers, staff would submit such contracts to the Board of Supervisors for consideration. DCD proposes to collect an initial deposit of $5,000 from each applicant to pay for County staff time and other costs incurred by the County to review an application. Staff may seek additional reimbursement of application processing costs from program providers if such costs exceed the initial $5,000 application fee deposit. Any portion of the deposit not spent will be returned to the applicant at the conclusion of the application process.        Jason Crapo presented the staff report and concluded that should the Committee and 6  Jason Crapo presented the staff report and concluded that should the Committee and the Board decide to proceed with PACE, then staff recommends contractual agreements that include the following risk mitigation provisions: (1) a requirement to participate in the State's PACE Loss Reserve Program, (2) a requirement that the program disclose to property owners potential financial risks associated with PACE financing, and (3) a requirement that the PACE provider indemnify the County for potential legal claims resulting from the program. Jason noted that the larger PACE providers already comply with these requirements in other jurisdictions. Supervisor Gioia commented that the PACE programs are voluntary and one of many financing options available to consumers, and that it is important to give residents of the county unincorporated area (est. 50,000-60,000 households) the same opportunities as other county residents. He noted that San Diego County, which is reputed to be fiscally conservative, was comfortable with implementing PACE with California First, HERO, and Fig Tree because there were adequate consumer disclosures. He added that there have been no draws to date from the State's loan loss reserve and that the loan loss reserve program incorporates some underwriting standards. The challenge is to implement a program that ensures that people get proper information when they are making their choices about financing. Nick Solis commented that FHFA does 90%+ of mortgage lending and, from a real estate practitioner's point of view, there are weaknesses in the PACE programs. He said that none of the risk mitigations under consideration change the fact that a PACE lien takes senior position on the tax bill (the basis for FHFA's objection). He said that the FHFA's warnings that the State's PACE loan loss reserve was inadequate should be taken seriously. He said realtors and lenders "don't know that they don't know" -- that due to time lapse between approval of a PACE lien and the appearance of a PACE lien on tax or title documents, lenders aren't always aware of the existence of a PACE encumbrance when a loan is approved. Carla Weston commented that PACE is still relatively new and that problems are only now beginning to emerge in counties that were in the forefront of PACE, such as Riverside County. She expressed concern over aggressive marketing or "trolling" to seniors, who may not understand the nuances of PACE financing and may not be in their homes long enough to recoup any of the costs. Tyra Wright suggested that homeowners of properties with PACE encumbrances should be required to sign indicating that the homeowner is aware of the risks (FHFA) and that proper disclosures will be made to buyers and mortgage lenders. Jason Crapo clarified for Jonathan Kevles that he is not recommending an competitive RFP (Request for Proposals) process to implement a County PACE program in which only one program is selected but, rather, that the County would receive all applications and evaluate each application on its own merits. He anticipated having multiple PACE providers operating in the County if the Board decided to implement PACE. David McCord of the Sierra Club spoke in favor of PACE. Steve Padburg of Solar 7 David McCord of the Sierra Club spoke in favor of PACE. Steve Padburg of Solar America commented that that homeowners want to match the asset life with the financing method. He added that PACE was not just about solar panels but other types of energy and water improvements to reduce energy consumption. His company has added four staff to meet consumer demand. Eve Perez commented that HERO has over 90% of all PACE projects, estimated at 27,000 projects valued at $525 million. She stated that of the 2,033 PACE lien holders who sold or refinanced their properties: 55% of those who sold their property successfully transferred the PACE lien to the buyer and 85% of refinances transacted successfully with the PACE lien, despite the FHFA warnings. Matt Turville commented in favor of PACE and stated that his Brentwood-based solar energy company that operates statewide has hired 14 new employees to meet consumer demand. Supervisor Gioia commented that PACE will eventually become systemized and with evolution, the County can develop educational materials to inform consumers about opportunities and risks. Heather Schiffman requested that the County put all disclosures about FHFA policies and their potential impacts to PACE borrowers on the County's website to help people understand the risks. Jason Crapo commented that should PACE continue to prosper, more companies will enter the market and programs may change over time. Consequently, he recommended the use of operating contracts that specify the County's requirements anticipating new entrants into the future market, ensuring the County's requirements are met as long as a program is operating in the county. Supervisor Mitchoff directed staff to prepare a plan of implementation for recommendation to the Board of Supervisors ideally by the end of April (last April Board meeting is April 21) or as soon as possible thereafter. Staff is to outline a structure and process modeled on Sonoma County and using the contractual agreement and risk mitigation measures recommended in the staff report.    AYE: Chair Karen Mitchoff, Vice Chair John Gioia  Passed   Attachments:  Attachment A FHFA Statement  Attachment B Fannie Mae Statement  Attachment C Program Summary  Attachment D Letter to Gov. Brown  Attachment E_FHFA Letter to Santa Clara County Counsel  Attachment F_SolarCity news article 10-8-14  Attachment G EMPower Program  Attachment H_Suspension of Fees for CA PACE Loss Reserve  Attachment I_Public Comment from Renewable Funding_November 2014  Attachment J_Pace Industry Response to IOC Request for PACE Information  Attachment K_CC Assoc of Realtors Response to IOC Request for PACE Information 8  Attachment L_Email to Bob Campbell re Pace Loss Reserve  Attachment M_Survey on CA Counties re PACE  Attachment N_San Diego County PACE Implementation  Attachment O_Diablo Solar Svcs Ltr of Support for PACE 6.The IOC review the above information and analysis and request the County to clarify the following respective roles pertaining to the MHSA budget process: The Board of Supervisors approves the MHSA Three Year Program and Expenditure Plan and yearly Plan Updates. a. The County Administrator’s Office provides recommendations to the Board of Supervisors regarding the MHSA Three Year Plan and Updates prepared by the Health Services Department. b. The Mental Health Commission reviews the adopted MHSA Three Year Plan or Update, and makes recommendations to the Behavioral Health Services Director for any revisions. The Mental Health Commission also monitors the implementation of the MHSA Three Year Plan or Update through Program Review reports and monthly Finance Reports as part of its review and evaluation of the community’s mental health needs, services facilities, and special problems, and reports to the Board of Supervisors.  c. The Consolidated Planning Advisory Workgroup advises the Behavioral Health Services Director regarding prioritized service needs and strategies to meet these needs, and assists the County to implement a comprehensive community program planning process in order to ensure active participation by the community in public mental health planning and evaluation efforts. d. All bodies commissioned by the County to support the above efforts are to abide by the letter and/or intent of the Brown Act to identify and mitigate any potential conflict of interest pertaining to recommendations regarding use of public resources, to include MHSA funds. e.       Staff framed the issue as "is CPAW functioning effectively or is there a need to have CPAW function differently?" Supervisor Mitchoff commented that while CPAW is advisory to the Behavioral Health Director and not subject to the Brown Act/Better Government Ordinance, she would like to establish a requirement that CPAW operate in accordance with the Brown Act/Better Government Ordinance. She noted the criticism about the membership of CPAW being weighted towards contractors and service providers, but verified that the actual composition of CPAW is balanced between consumers/family members and services providers. Warren Hayes clarified that while one or two CPAW members may happen to be members of NAMI, no seats are designated specifically for NAMI. He said that the stakeholders are defined in statute and, based on the stakeholder requirements, 35 seats are currently authorized, of which 22 are currently filled. Supervisor Mitchoff suggested that the number of seats could be reduced. She asked staff to provide list and number of stakeholder categories so that the IOC can determine the appropriate composition of CPAW at a future IOC meeting. Theresa Pasquini commented that CPAW was originally formed by combining 9 Theresa Pasquini commented that CPAW was originally formed by combining several other stakeholder groups, which operated more formally than CPAW. The MHC operates in conformance with the Brown Act/ BGO and has two representatives on CPAW. There has been some territorialism between the MHC and CPAW. Some consumer members struggle with the formal process. She said that a goal in this review should be to minimize redundancy between the MHC and CPAW so that members would not have to attend so many meetings. Lauren Rettagliata commented that 35 is too many people on CPAW and she supports reducing the committee size. She reported that the three-hour meetings are too long and unfocused. Sharon Madison commented that the CPAW meetings were open to the public but said that at the meeting she attended, committee members were disrespectful to the public when they commented and the paid moderator did not effectively control the meeting. That experience made her concerned about transparency, effectiveness and oversight. Candace Pereira thinks that the changes to CPAW that IOC is contemplating should adequately address the weaknesses. She commented that some CPAW members serve on the executive committee and multiple subcommittees, and so the same voice is being repeated in every venue instead of many stakeholder voices. Kate Bieker commented that the Superior Court is a stakeholder and would like to participate in the County's planning and implementation of Laura's Law. Janet Marshall spoke in support of having CPAW operate under the Brown Act/BGO. She expressed concern about how consumers receive and process complex information and provide written public comment, attached hereto. Supervisor Mitchoff concurred that consumer advocates are needed. Charles Madison clarified that currently only one member of CPAW is a member of NAMI. He felt that other counties' models should be considered, with the goal that all stakeholders should be represented. Douglas Dunn offered some recommendations on changes to the CPAW structure: prohibit multiple membership designations per individual, limit the number services contractors and Behavioral Health staff, break up the current Steering and Membership Subcommittees to open up the process. Supervisor Mitchoff requested staff's recommendations for alternate models at a future IOC meeting. Cynthia Belon indicated that she is open to reconstituting CPAW and reviewing other models; and that this is an opportune time to make other kinds of changes to improve how CPAW functions. Supervisor Mitchoff asked Behavioral Health staff to report back to IOC in 60 days with its findings and recommendations on how to reconstitute CPAW.    AYE: Chair Karen Mitchoff, Vice Chair John Gioia  Passed  10  Attachments:  Board Order Referral_MHSA  Public Comment Submitted at Meeting  Synopsis of CPAW (Consolidated Planning Advisory Workgroup) 7.The next meeting is currently scheduled for April 13, 2015.    8.Adjourn    The Chair adjourned the meeting at 4:10 p.m.     The Internal Operations Committee will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend Internal Operations 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 Internal Operations 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:  Julie DiMaggio Enea, Committee Staff Phone (925) 335-1077, Fax (925) 646-1353 julie.enea@cao.cccounty.us 11 INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE 4. Meeting Date:04/13/2015   Subject:NOMINATION TO THE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMISSION Submitted For: William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director  Department:Health Services Referral No.: IOC 13/5   Referral Name: ADVISORY BODY RECRUITMENT  Presenter: Michael Kent, Hazardous Materials Ombudsman Contact: Michael Kent (925) 313-6587 Referral History: The IOC reviews nominations made by the Hazardous Materials Commission for appointments all Commission seats except the City seats. Seat terms are four years. Despite several solicitations for nominations, the Environmental #2 Alternate seat has been vacant since 2010. Nominations for this seat are to come from environmental organizations within the county. Referral Update: Attached is a memo from the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman seeking approval of the nomination of Peter Dragovich by the Martinez Environmental Group. All supporting documents are attached for reference. Because there is less than 25% of the term left and the seat has been so difficult to fill, staff recommends appointment to complete the remainder of the current term and also to a new four-year term, the total time being 4 years and 9 months. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): APPROVE the nomination of Peter Dragovich (Martinez) to the Environmental #2 Alternate seat on the Hazardous Materials Commission to complete the unexpired term ending on December 31, 2015 and to a new term ending on December 31, 2019. Fiscal Impact (if any): None. Attachments HazMat Commission Nomination Packet/Candidate Application 12 HazMat Commission Press Release HazMat Commission Recruitment Flyer HazMat Commission Recruitment Letter 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Members: George Smith – Chair, Rick Alcaraz, Scott Anderson, Don Tatzin, Henry Clark, Lara DeLaney, Frank Gordon, Steven Linsley, Jim Payne, Jimmy Rodgers, Ralph Sattler, Leslie Stewart, Don Bristol 597 Center Avenue, Suite 200, Martinez CA 94553 Phone (925) 313-6712 Fax (925) 313-6721 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMISSION FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Michael Kent September 23, 2013 PHONE: (925) 313-6587 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMISSION SEEKS APPLICANTS The Contra Costa County Hazardous Materials Commission is seeking applicants to fill an Environmental – Alternate seat. The Commission is a voluntary body appointed by the Board of Supervisors, and makes policy recommendations to the Board and County staff on issues concerning hazardous materials and hazardous waste. The Commission’s 13 members serve four-year terms and include representatives of industry, labor, civic groups, environmental organizations, environmental engineers, the general public, and the Mayors Conference. Applicants for the Environmental - Alternate Seat must:  be nominated by an environmental organization;  have demonstrated knowledge of hazardous materials issues;  live or work in Contra Costa County, and can commit to attending the monthly Commission and Committee meeting’s, in the event the seat holder is unavailable; To obtain an application form, or for further information, contact Michael Kent, Executive Assistant to the Commission, at (925) 313-6587. Applications may also be obtained from the Clerk of the Board located at 651 Pine St. 1st Fl., Martinez CA 94553. You may also download an application from the County’s website: http://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentView.aspx?DID=6433 Filing Date: Applications must be postmarked by October 4, 2013 and mailed to the Clerk of the Board. 22 Members: George Smith – Chair, Rick Alcaraz, Scott Anderson, Don Tatzin, Henry Clark, Lara DeLaney, Frank Gordon, Steven Linsley, Jim Payne, Jimmy Rodgers, Ralph Sattler, Leslie Stewart, Don Bristol 597 Center Avenue, Suite 200, Martinez CA 94553 Phone (925) 313-6712 Fax (925) 313-6721 ** PLEASE POST or DISTRIBUTE ** CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMISSION SEEKS APPLICANTS DO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS POLICY ISSUES INTEREST YOU? The Contra Costa County Hazardous Materials Commission is seeking applicants to fill an Environmental Seat - Alternate. You may apply if you …  are nominated by an environmental organization; or firm  live or work in Contra Costa County;  have demonstrated knowledge of hazardous materials issues;  can commit to regular attendance at monthly Commission meetings and a monthly Committee meeting, in the event the seat holder is unavailable; The Commission is a voluntary body appointed by the Board of Supervisors, and makes policy recommendations to the Board and County staff on issues concerning hazardous materials and hazardous waste. The Commission’s 13 members serve four-year terms and include representatives of industry, labor, civic groups, environmental organizations, environmental engineers, the general public, and the Mayors Conference. To obtain an application form, or for further information, contact Michael Kent, Executive Assistant to the Commission, at (925) 313-6587. Applications may also be obtained from the Clerk of the Board located at 651 Pine Street 1st Floor, Martinez CA 94553. You may also download an application from the County’s website: http://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentView.aspx?DID=6433 Filing Date: Applications must be postmarked by October 4, 2013 and mailed to the Clerk of the Board. 23 Members: George Smith – Chair, Rick Alcaraz, Scott Anderson, Don Tatzin, Henry Clark, Lara DeLaney, Frank Gordon, Steven Linsley, Jim Payne, Jimmy Rodgers, Ralph Sattler, Leslie Stewart, Don Bristol 597 Center Avenue, Suite 200, Martinez CA 94553 Phone (925) 313-6712 Fax (925) 313-6721 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMISSION September 23, 2013 Dear Colleague: The Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Commission is seeking applicants to fill an Environmental Seat - Alternate. Applications must be postmarked by October 4, 2013. Appointed by the Board of Supervisors to advise them on hazardous materials issues, including industrial safety, the 13-member Commission is comprised of representatives of industry, labor, environmental groups, civic groups, the public, engineers/industrial hygienists, and elected officials. Members serve four-year terms, and must live or work in Contra Costa County. I hope your organization will take up this rare opportunity and nominate an applicant. The Commission offers a chance for direct participaton in creating county policy on vital issues of great public concern. Enclosed you will find leaflets for posting and or distribution. The Commission would also like to extend an invitation to any interested party to attend Commission meetings which are generally held the 4th Thursday of every month at the County Connection, 2477 Arnold Industrial Way, in Concord. Please check the website for the next scheduled meeting. http://cchealth.org/hazmat/hmc/ To obtain an application form, or for further information, contact Michael Kent, Executive Assistant to the Commission, at (925) 313-6587. Applications may also be obtained from the Clerk of the Board located at 651 Pine Street, 1st Floor, Martinez CA 94553. You may also download an application from the County’s website: http://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentView.aspx?DID=6433 Should you have further questions, please do not hesitate to call me. I can be reached directly at (925) 313-6587. Sincerely, Michael Kent Executive Assistant to the Hazardous Materials Commission Enclosure 24 INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE 5. Meeting Date:04/13/2015   Subject:CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS FOR AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION Submitted For: John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department  Department:Conservation & Development Referral No.: IOC 15/5   Referral Name: ADVISORY BODY RECRUITMENT  Presenter: Jamar Stamps Contact: Jamar Stamps (925) 674-7832 Referral History: The Board of Supervisors created the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) in 1970 to promote the orderly development of compatible land uses around each public airport in the County, in order to safeguard both the interests of the general public and the welfare of inhabitants in the areas surrounding the airports. The California Public Utilities Code requires and specifies the composition of the ALUC, whose membership shall include: (1) Two representing the cities in the county, appointed by a city selection committee comprised of the mayors of all the cities within that county, except that if there are any cities contiguous or adjacent to the qualifying airport, at least one representative shall be appointed therefrom. (2) Two representing the county, appointed by the board of supervisors. (3) Two having expertise in aviation, appointed by a selection committee comprised of the managers of all of the public airports within that county. (4) One representing the general public, appointed by the other six members of the commission. The Internal Operations Committee conducts interviews for the two County seats described in item 2, above, and makes recommendations to the Board of Supervisors for appointment. Seat terms are four years, expiring the first Monday in May. Referral Update: The term of the Appointee #2 seat expired in May 2011. However, Hal Yeager, who has continued to serve in the Appointee #2 seat, has notified the County that he must resign for personal reasons and does not wish to be considered for a new term. The term of the Appointee #1 seat expired in May 2012 and prior incumbent Tom Weber has continued to serve in that capacity until the Board appoints a successor, whose term will expire on May 2, 2016. The Conservation and Development Department recruited to fill two vacancies. The recruitment garnered 12 applications. One application was later withdrawn and one was rejected due to non-eligibility, leaving 10 candidates for consideration. The following candidates were invited to interview with the IOC today: Felix Boston (Pleasant Hill) James Flessner (Danville)25 James Flessner (Danville) Alexander Golovets (San Pablo) John Jewell (Discovery Bay) Charles Kreling (Walnut Creek) Geoffrey Logan (Walnut Creek) Ronald Reagan (Brentwood) Shaun Rice (Lafayette) Hanspal Ravinderpal (H.R.) Singh (San Ramon) Thomas Weber (Pleasant Hill), incumbent Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): INTERVIEW candidates for the BOS Appointee 1 seat, to complete the unexpired term ending on May 2, 2016; and for the BOS Appointee 2 seat, to complete the current term expiring on May 4, 2015 and to a new four-year term expiring on May 6, 2019, on the Airport Land Use Commission and CONSIDER determining recommendations for Board of Supervisors consideration. Attachments Candidate Application_ALUC_Felix Boston Candidate Application_ALUC_James Flessner Candidate Application_ALUC_Alexander Golovets Candidate Application_ALUC_John Jewell Candidate Application_ALUC_Charles Kreling Candidate Application_ALUC_Charles Kreling_Resume Candidate Application_ALUC_Geoffrey Logan Candidate Application_ALUC_Ronald Reagan Candidate Application_ALUC_Shaun Rice Candidate Application_ALUC_H R Singh Candidate Application_ALUC_Thomas Weber DCD ALUC Recruitment Announcement 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION NAME AND SEAT TITLE YOU ARE APPLYING FOR: ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ PRINT EXACT NAME OF BOARD, COMMITTEE, OR COMMISSION PRINT EXACT SEAT NAME (if applicable) 5. EDUCATION: Check appropriate box if you possess one of the following: High School Diploma G.E.D. Certificate California High School Proficiency Certificate Give Highest Grade or Educational Level Achieved________________________________________________ Names of colleges / universities attended Course of Study / Major Degree Awarded Units Completed Degree Type Date Degree Awarded Semester Quarter A) Yes No B) Yes No C) Yes No D) Other schools / training completed: Course Studied Hours Completed Certificate Awarded: Yes No For Reviewers Use Only: Accepted Rejected Contra Costa County Contra Costa County CLERK OF THE BOARD 651 Pine Street, Rm. 106 Martinez, California 94553-1292 PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN INK (Each Position Requires a Separate Application) BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS APPLICATION MAIL OR DELIVER TO: 1. Name:_______________________________________________________________________ (Last Name) (First Name) (Middle Name) 2. Address: _______________________________________________________ (No.) (Street) (Apt.) (City) (State) (Zip Code) 3. Phones: ________________________________________________________ (Home No.) (Work No.) (Cell No.) 4. Email Address: ________________________________________________ For Office Use Only Date Received: For Reviewers Use Only: Reason: Education Experience Incomplete Other 39 THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT 6. PLEASE FILL OUT THE FOLLOWING SECTION COMPLETELY. List experience that relates to the qualifications needed to serve on the local appointive body. Begin with your most recent experience. A resume or other supporting documentation may be attached but it may not be used as a substitute for completing this section. A) Dates (Month, Day, Year) From To Total: Yrs. Mos. Hrs. per week_____ . Volunteer Title Duties Performed Employer’s  Name  and  Address B) Dates (Month, Day, Year) From To Total: Yrs. Mos. Hrs. per week_____ . Volunteer Title Duties Performed Employer’s  Name  and  Address   C) Dates (Month, Day, Year) From To Total: Yrs. Mos. Hrs. per week_____ . Volunteer Title Duties Performed Employer’s  Name  and  Address   D) Dates (Month, Day, Year) From To Total: Yrs. Mos. Hrs. per week_____ . Volunteer Title Duties Performed Employer’s  Name  and  Address   40 41 Charles J. Kreling, CMA, CHP Mobile Walnut Creek, CA 94598 Accounting/Finance/Audit/Compliance/Information Technology Leader An experienced compliance and audit professional with a focus on strategy, delivery and improvement of regulatory compliance and internal controls processes and procedures. High-value combination of business and information technology disciplines. Highly effective leader focused on prioritization, implementation and attainment of results via team development, coaching, and collaboration across diverse organizations. Specialties: Executive level leadership, strong technical skills in accounting, finance, internal controls, audit, SOX, compliance, risk management, NAIC Model Audit Rule (MAR), HIPAA Security, Meaningful Use and Information Technology. Professional Experience Independent Consultant 2014 - Present Audit, Compliance, Finance, SOX, Model Audit Rule, HIPAA, IT, SOC2  Bazell Technologies, Independent – Executive dashboards, Business Planning, IT Strategy.  Abbyy, Accretive Solutions – HIPAA Security.  Castlight Health, BVOH – SOC2 policies & procedures.  GoodData, Accretive Solutions – HIPAA Security/Privacy risk analysis.  Autodesk, Accretive Solutions – IT SOX, IT Compliance Strategy.  Prothena, Accretive Solutions – IT SOX.  Wells Fargo Bank, Accretive Solutions – Loan Portfolio Compliance. Kaiser Permanente Information Technology 2012 - 2014 Executive Director, HIPAA Security  Developed and achieved a comprehensive, risk-based strategy for Kaiser’s HIPAA Security compliance program.  Provided leadership, direction, and oversight for technology-related aspects of the HIPAA Omnibus Rule.  Led compliance with the HIPAA Security Rule ensuring privacy and security of member electronic protected health information (ePHI).  Collaborated across diverse organizations including information technology and business senior leadership, the National Compliance Office, Internal Audit Services, the SOX PMO, Medical Group leadership, and Finance.  Combined disparate groups into an integrated team of twenty-four professionals while promoting nine individuals and creating a high performing team. Kaiser Permanente 2007 - 2012 Executive Director, Sarbanes-Oxley  Provided strategic leadership to the Company through the SOX Project Management Office (PMO) and facilitation for all key SOX functions: Scoping and Planning, Design, Documentation, Remediation, Testing and Evaluation.  Led an integrated SOX/NAIC Model Audit Rule (MAR) initiative across all locations and for all business processes to completion for the first time at Kaiser Permanente. Attained the goal of no Material Weaknesses set by the SOX Governance Board.  Partnered with Ernst & Young (SOX Advisors), KPMG (External Auditor) and multiple business leaders to achieve results through collaboration and teamwork across a diverse and complex organization.  Subject matter expert on SOX, PCAOB and NAIC Model Audit Rule (MAR) internal controls guidelines for the Company. Authored whitepapers for complex SOX issues.  Created and implemented a comprehensive, automated risk rating model that determined the testing strategy for the Company. 42 Charles J. Kreling Mobile Page 2  Developed the methodology for evaluation of control deficiencies for the Company and presented to senior leadership and the Audit and Compliance Committee.  Communicated and presented regularly to senior leadership the status and issues related to the project and its outcomes.  Recruited and developed a high performing team. Kaiser Permanente 2006 - 2007 Director, SOX Information Systems & Processes  Partnered with Senior Leadership (SOX Governance Board, Audit and Compliance Committee) to create meaningful metrics and reporting for internal controls.  Implemented a national compliance tool (Risk Navigator) enabling tracking, reporting and measurement of internal controls performance.  Developed and implemented the first integrated executive reporting dashboards for SOX and other compliance areas.  Hired and led a team of professionals.  Developed and delivered national training materials and education for regional SOX teams, process leads and key project participants. Resources Global Professionals 2005 - 2006 Finance / Information Technology Consultant at Kaiser Permanente  Provided leadership and solutions for Sarbanes Oxley (SOX) systems architecture and applications leading to efficient project management at the Company’s Corporate Program Offices and Northern California regional headquarters.  Implemented Risk Navigator, an Enterprise Risk Management solution that provides data storage, reporting and accountability services to the entire enterprise wide SOX project.  Member of key committees creating and deploying SOX project methodologies, plans, training and directions across the organization. Bazell Technologies Corporation 2002 - 2005 Chief Financial Officer, Chief Technology Officer  Managed all accounting, financial reporting, administration, human resources and information technology functions.  Key strategist in company turnaround from annual losses to profitability through process improvement, cost cutting, and faster, accurate information processing and presentment.  Created and implemented custom software and database applications that improved productivity of operations and financial activities.  Successfully managed relationships with banking and credit facilities.  Led all finance and accounting activities during acquisition due diligence process. Past Experience Independent Consultant – Principal, Finance, Accounting, Information Technology Telocity - Senior Director Financial Information Systems AirTouch Communications - Director Financial Information Systems Pacific Bell - Applications Development Manager / Senior Accounting Manager Coopers & Lybrand - Senior Associate, EDP Auditor, Consultant Arthur Andersen & Co. - In-Charge Accountant, EDP Auditor 43 Charles J. Kreling Mobile Page 3 Education and Certifications Certified Management Accountant (CMA) Certified HIPAA Professional (CHP) B.S. Business Administration, University of California Berkeley, Summa Cum Laude, University Certificate of Distinction, University Medal Finalist Professional and Community Affiliations Institute of Management Accountants, Past Treasurer, Director of Corporate Relations and Director of Academic Relations United States Coast Guard Auxiliary, Staff Officer / Instructor, Flotilla 1-9, US Coast Guard Air Station San Francisco San Francisco Sheriff’s Air Squadron, Special Deputy, Pilot, Past Commander Federal Aviation Administration, Licensed Pilot, Advanced/Instrument Ground Instructor Contra Costa County Merit Board, Chair (similar to a civil service commission) 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Telephone: 674-7832 Fax: 674-7258 TO: Members, Board of Supervisors Members, Municipal Advisory Council FROM: John Kopchik, Director By: Jamar Stamps, Senior Planner DATE: February 12, 2015 SUBJECT: Vacancies on the Contra Costa County Airport Land Use Commission This is to inform you that there will be two vacancies (effective May 4, 2015) for County representation on the Contra Costa County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The ALUC is comprised of 7 members: 2 appointed by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors; 2 appointed by the Contra Costa County Mayor’s Conference; 2 appointed by the Contra Costa County Director of Airports; and 1 At-Large member appointed by the balance of the ALUC. All ALUC members serve a four-year term in a volunteer capacity. Relevant information on the function of the ALUC can be found on the ALUC website at http://www.contracosta.ca.gov/4307/Airport-Land-Use-Commission-ALUC. A copy of the application is enclosed and can also be found here: http://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/6433. In addition, Contra Costa Television (CCTV) will forward a media release to various daily and weekly newspapers and publications for countywide public advertisement. Applications will be accepted until Friday, March 13, 2015. Interested candidates can either apply online, or download the application and fax or mail the completed form to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA 94553 (postmarked by Friday, March 13, 2015). Should you have any questions, please contact Jamar Stamps at (925) 674-7832, or via email at jamar.stamps@dcd.cccounty.us. Enclosure cc: Clerk of the Board CAO Better Government Ordinance file J. Cunningham, DCD A. Bhat, DCD 64 THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION NAME AND SEAT TITLE YOU ARE APPLYING FOR: ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ PRINT EXACT NAME OF BOARD, COMMITTEE, OR COMMISSION PRINT EXACT SEAT NAME (if applicable) 5. EDUCATION: Check appropriate box if you possess one of the following: High School Diploma G.E.D. Certificate California High School Proficiency Certificate Give Highest Grade or Educational Level Achieved________________________________________________ Names of colleges / universities attended Course of Study / Major Degree Awarded Units Completed Degree Type Date Degree Awarded Semester Quarter A) Yes No B) Yes No C) Yes No D) Other schools / training completed: Course Studied Hours Completed Certificate Awarded: Yes No For Reviewers Use Only: Accepted Rejected Contra Costa County Contra Costa County CLERK OF THE BOARD 651 Pine Street, Rm. 106 Martinez, California 94553-1292 PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN INK (Each Position Requires a Separate Application) BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS APPLICATION MAIL OR DELIVER TO: 1. Name:_______________________________________________________________________ (Last Name) (First Name) (Middle Name) 2. Address: ____________________________________________________________________ (No.) (Street) (Apt.) (City) (State) (Zip Code) 3. Phones: ____________________________________________________________________ (Home No.) (Work No.) (Cell No.) 4. Email Address: ______________________________________________________________ For Office Use Only Date Received: Print Form 65 THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT 6. PLEASE FILL OUT THE FOLLOWING SECTION COMPLETELY. List experience that relates to the qualifications needed to serve on the local appointive body. Begin with your most recent experience. A resume or other supporting documentation may be attached but it may not be used as a substitute for completing this section. A) Dates (Month, Day, Year) From To Total: Yrs. Mos. Hrs. per week_____ . Volunteer Title Duties Performed Employer’s Name and Address B) Dates (Month, Day, Year) From To Total: Yrs. Mos. Hrs. per week_____ . Volunteer Title Duties Performed Employer’s Name and Address C) Dates (Month, Day, Year) From To Total: Yrs. Mos. Hrs. per week_____ . Volunteer Title Duties Performed Employer’s Name and Address D) Dates (Month, Day, Year) From To Total: Yrs. Mos. Hrs. per week_____ . Volunteer Title Duties Performed Employer’s Name and Address 66 THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT 7. How did you learn about this vacancy? CCC Homepage Walk-In Newspaper Advertisement District Supervisor Other _________________________ 8. Do you have a Familial or Financial Relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please see Board Resolution no. 2011/55, attached): No ______ Yes______ If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: ______________________________________________ 9. Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relations? No ______ Yes______ If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: ______________________________________________ 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 understand that all information in this application is publically accessible. I understand and agree that misstatements / omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a Board, Committee, or Commission in Contra Costa County. Sign Name: _____________________________________________ Date: __________________________________ Important Information 1. This application is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Gov. Code §6250-6270). 2. Send the completed paper application to the Office of the Clerk of the Board at: 651 Pine Street, Room 106, Martinez, CA 94553. 3. A résumé or other relevant information may be submitted with this application. 4. All members are required to take the following training: 1) The Brown Act, 2) The Better Government Ordinance, and 3) Ethics Training. 5. Members of 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. 6. Advisory body meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. 7. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two days per month. 8. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 67 THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted Resolution no. 2011/55 on 2/08/2011 as follows: WHEREAS the Board of Supervisors wishes to avoid the reality or appearance of improper influence or favoritism; IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTING A POLICY MAKING FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS INELIGIBLE FOR APPOINTMENT TO BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR COMMISSIONS FOR WHICH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IS THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the following policy is hereby adopted: 1. Mother, father, son, and daughter; 2. Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter; I. SCOPE: This policy applies to appointments to any seats on boards, committees or commissions for which the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors is the appointing authority. II. POLICY: A person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is rela ted to a Board of Supervisors’ Member in any of the following relationships: 3. Great-grandfather, great-grandmother, aunt, uncle, nephew, niece, great-grandson, and great-granddaughter; 4. First cousin; 5. Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter; 6. Sister-in-law (brother’s spouse or spouse’s sister), brother-in-law (sister’s spouse or spouse’s brother), spouse’s grandmother, spouse’s grandfather, spouse’s granddaughter, and spouse’s grandson; 7. Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297. 8. The relatives, as defined in 5 and 6 above, for a registered domestic partner. 9. 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. 68 1 County Administrator’s Office • 651 Pine Street • Martinez, CA 94553 • www.co.contra-costa.ca.us Media Advisory FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Jamar Stamps, ALUC Staff Friday, February 13, 2015 Dept. of Conservation & Development Community Development Division Phone: (925) 674-7832 Email: jamar.stamps@dcd.cccounty.us WOULD YOU LIKE TO SERVE ON THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION? CONTRA COSTA COUNTY – The County is seeking individuals who are interested in serving on Contra Costa County’s Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The Commission’s role and responsibilities are to:  Formulate land use policies that restrict the development of lands to assure compatibility with planned operations of public use airports;  Review the general plans of local agencies for consistency with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan; and  Review proposed modification to the airport master plans for consistency with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Commission members are expected to attend at least one meeting a month. Regular meetings of the ALUC are held on the fourth Wednesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. in the Department of Conservation and Development, Zoning Administrator Room, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553. Background study, occasional filed trips and extra meetings are sometimes necessary. Members shall serve without compensation. During the term of office, each member shall reside or work in Contra Costa County. There are seven members on the ALUC. There are two vacancies for commissioners that are appointed by the Board of Supervisors. The appointed members are required to comply with the Fair and Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest Code reporting requirements in State law. The term of office of each member is four years and until the appointment and qualification of his or her successor. Contra Costa County 69 2 An application form may be obtained from the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors by calling (925) 335-1900 or by visiting the County webpage at http://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/6433. Completed applications should be returned to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA 94553 postmarked by Friday, March 13, 2015. For further information, please call Jamar Stamps, with the Department of Conservation & Development, Transportation Planning Division, at (925) 674-7832. 70 INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE 6. Meeting Date:04/13/2015   Subject:CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS: IMPARTIAL OBSERVERS AND EVALUATOR FOR AMBULANCE RFP SCORING Submitted For: David Twa, County Administrator  Department:County Administrator Referral No.:   Referral Name: AMBULANCE RFP IMPARTIAL OBSERVER RECRUITMENT  Presenter: Julie DiMaggio Enea Contact: Julie DiMaggio Enea 925.335.1077 Referral History: The Board approved the following process for the selection for the 2 impartial observers of the 3 day RFP scoring. Advertisements for interested parties will be placed on the County home page, on the Health Services Department website, in the local newspaper, e-mailed to all known parties who may have an interest and posted by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors in the same manner currently used for vacancies on advisory bodies. Interested applicants will submit a cover letter explaining their interest and a resume detailing their qualifications Applicants must be residents of Contra Costa County Applicants may not be current or former County employees or employees, board members, or consultants of any potential bidder Applicants must be able to commit a minimum of three full days, from June 3-5, 2015 Application period will be open for a minimum of two weeks The candidates will be selected by the Internal Operations Committee for recommendation to the Board of Supervisors based on the candidate's ability to meet the above criteria. Referral Update: Staff advertised the Observer and Evaluator positions for three weeks and received five applications. Two applicants, Michelle Voos and David Joslin, were determined to be ineligible due to their prior employment with either the County or with a potential bidder. The following three applicants were determined to be eligible for the Observer or Evaluator role and were invited to be interviewed today: Janice Howe, San Ramon (Observer) Nuru Neemuchwalla, Pleasant Hill (Evaluator/Observer) Stephen F. Smith, Brentwood (Evaluator) 71 Their letters and resumes are attached for reference. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): CONDUCT interviews of the candidates for two impartial observers and one evaluator of the Three-Day Ambulance Service RFP (Request for Proposals) scoring process and DETERMINE recommendations for consideration by the Board of Supervisors.  Fiscal Impact (if any): None. The positions are uncompensated. Attachments Recruitment Announcement Candidate Letter of Introduction_Resume_Janice L. Howe Candidate Letter of Introduction_Nuru Neemuchwalla Candidate Resume_Nuru Neemuchwalla Candidate Letter of Introduction_Stephen Smith Candidate Resume_Stephen Smith 72 Contra Costa County County Administrator’s Office • 651 Pine Street • Martinez, CA 94553 • www.co.contra-costa.ca.us Media Release FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Julie DiMaggio Enea Friday, March 6, 2015 Phone: (925) 335-1077 Email: julie.enea@cao.cccounty.us WOULD YOU LIKE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SELECTION OF THE EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICE PROVIDER FOR CONTRA COSTA COUNTY? Contra Costa County Supervisors are seeking one individual to serve as Evaluator and two individuals to serve as Impartial Observers during the selection of the County's emergency ambulance service provider. The role of Evaluator is to review the bids submitted by each potential emergency ambulance service provider, and evaluate and rate the bids in accordance with the requirements of the County’s Request for Proposals. The role of the Impartial Observers is to ensure that the process for evaluating competitive bids of ambulance service providers is conducted fairly by the people involved, and is similar to the impartial observer role used during the vote counts of county elections. The evaluation of competitive bids is scheduled from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. each day of the three-day period of June 3-5, 2015. To be eligible to serve as an Evaluator or Impartial Observer: You may not be a current or former Contra Costa County employee. You may not be a current or former employee, board member, or consultant of any potential bidder. You must be able to commit your time to the complete three-day evaluation period of June 3-5, 2015. Interested candidates are asked to submit a cover letter and resume outlining their qualifications for consideration. The applications will be reviewed by the County's Internal Operations Committee, which will forward its recommendations to the Board of Supervisors within 30 days. Successful applicants will need to meet the criteria above, and demonstrate their level of knowledge about the County's Emergency Medical Services system. These are volunteer positions. In the event that no applicants are available who meet the criteria, the review process will proceed with individuals designated by the County Administrator's Office. If you are interested, please send your cover letter and resume to Senior Deputy County Administrator Julie DiMaggio Enea, 651 Pine Street, 10th Floor, Martinez, CA., 94553 or julie.enea@cao.cccounty.us. The application deadline is 5:00 p.m. on March 30, 2015. # # # # 73 1 Julie Enea From: Sent:Monday, March 16, 2015 5:16 PM To:Julie Enea Subject:Application for Observer position for county Ambulance contract RFP Julie DiMaggio Enea, Senior Deputy County Administrator March 16, 2015 651 Pine St., 10th Floor Martinez, CA 94553 Observer Position for Emergency Ambulance Service Provider, June 3 – 5, 2015 I’m applying for one of the volunteer observer positions scheduled to watch the evaluation process for all day June 3 to 5, 2015 where RFPs for the new ambulance service contract. I meet the stated criteria for this position: * I am not and have not been an employee of Contra Costa County. * I have not and am not currently an employee, board member, or consultant for any ambulance service contract bidder.  I am committed to attend 8 to 5, June 3 to 5, 2015 to be an observer. I was once appointed as a representative-at-large for the CCC Council on Aging, but I resigned that commitment several years ago. That was an unpaid volunteer spot, and I continue to attend the Health Work Group subcommittee of the ACOA, which I once chaired. My continued interest in the ambulance service contracts was cultivated by that Work Group over several years. I attend interviews by the consultants for this RFP, heard presentations from Pat Frost, RN, Dr. Barger, and others, attended Supervisor meetings on the RFP process, and attended public meetings on this service. The involvement of civic-minded seniors in the process of overseeing the process of selecting contractors is critical to the services all county residents will be using, funding, and evaluating. We are the consumers most likely to use ambulance emergency services. Medical or emergency experts are necessary for this process, but residents need to participate in order for their needs to be met. Please review my attached resume to gauge my civic involvement and expertise as pertains to this position for which I am applying. Janice L. Howe, RN (ret.), PHN, BSN, BA San Ramon 94583 74 2 Presently: Retired Registered Nurse – formerly employed by Kaiser Hayward Hospice Home Care. Advisory Board, Curriculum, Marketing/ Fund Raising committees for Cal State University Scholar Olli (Bernard Osher Life Long Learning Institute) – Concord Board California Walks, pedestrian safety advocacy group, Oakland Recording Secretary – Alameda Co. – California Alliance of Retired Americans (CARA) League of Women Voters – Diablo Valley member (formerly Program Chair) California Nurses Association (CNA) – Retiree Division member Delegate to the Alameda County Central labor Council for CARA Past experience: 75 3 CCC ACOA rep at large – Chair Health Committee; member Planning Com. where RFPs reviewed for funding from the county for services to seniors Congressman Jerry McNerney’s Health Care advisory committee Former recording secretary for CCC Health Care for All chapter Former treasurer for the Kaiser Hayward employee committee Former Chair for Region Eleven – CNA Scholarship committee Former Board Chair for Region Eleven – Alameda County CNA Former Professional Performance Com. Chair for Hayward Kaiser contract RNs 76 Captain Nuru Neemuchwalla , Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Res: - 3/27/2014 To, M/s Julie DiMaggio Enea Senior Deputy County Administrator County Administrator’s Office 651 Pine st. Martinez, CA 94553. Re: Media Release of 3/6/2015 for Evaluator/Impartial Observer for EASP. I would like to participate for the Volunteer position of Evaluator/Impartial observer in the selection of the Emergency Ambulance Service Provider for Contra Costa County. Your Needs:  You May not be a current or former Contra Costa County employee.  You may not be a current or former employee, board member, or consultant of any potential bidder.  You must be able to commit your time to the complete three-day evaluation period of June 3-5, 2015. My Qualifications:  I clearly meet all the three requirements above. (See resume attached). I am presently retired from the Shipping Business, and am doing volunteer work for AARP and the ACOA (Health committee).  I have lived in Pleasant Hill for the last 38 years (since 1977) and have had my kids go to school in Pleasant Hill and onto college.  Due to my long residency, I have a loyalty to the development and traditions of this area and hence my participation in the health Committee of the ACOA (Advisory Council on Aging).  My Career of 18 years in the Merchant Navy terminating as a Captain prepared me to deal with Maritime laws. Human behavior, Health of the Vessels Crew and Business of ensuring the profitability of vessel owners.  My Shore-side service of 24 years working for a Corporation involved in Stevedoring/Terminal operations gave me the experience to negotiate contracts with labor/Ports/service companies as the General Manager. My attached resume provides more detail about my background and skills. I will gladly volunteer my services to either of the positions advertised in your press release. Sincerely, SD: N.A.Neemuchwalla Capt. Nuru Neemuchwalla. 77 Professional Summary Work History Education CAPTAIN NURU NEEMUCHWALLA Pleasant HIll, CA 94523 • Home: • Cell: • I graduated from a Merchant Marine Academy Training Ship, " T.S.Dufferin" in 1958. This was equivalent to a graduate degree in a U.C. In 1961 Appeared and successfully completed My 2nd Mates License qualifying exam. In 1963 Appeared and successfully completed my Chief Mates License qualifying license exam. In 1965 Appeared and successfully completed my Masters License qualifying License exam. In 1972 I was promoted to Captain and performed those functions till 1976 when I migrated to the USA. In 1976 arrived in the USA and used my Shipping experience to work on stevedoring of Merchant Ships and rose to the post of General Manager in Maersk Line LTD. Maersk line is a Danish Corporation and one of the biggest Container Shipping line in the world. Trainee to a Marine Captain, 07/1965 to 06/1975 Scindia Steam Navigation Company – Bombay, India Joined Scindia Steam Navigation ( A Shipping Line engaged in trading all over the world) in 1958 as a Trainee Cadet, and rose to the position of Captain. In this capacity managed the companies ships with general cargo and navigated it all over the world as needed. Superintendent/Terminal manager., 10/1976 to 04/1991 Marine Terminal Corporation – San Francisco, CA Initially supervised the Safe loading & Unloading of Merchant ships at the Maersk Line Terminal of the Port of Oakland and ended up being a General Manager at the same facility. In this Capacity operated this facility from receiving/Delivering containers, as also loading and discharging them from the Maersk Ships. During my tenure as Terminal Manager we hold the record for the Best container handling productivity, with the movement of a total of 860 containers in an eight hour period. Terminal Manager/General Manager, 03/1991 to 01/2001 Maersk Shipping Line – Madison, NJ 82 I was the Terminal Manager in charge of all the operations of the Bay Area and the Maersk Terminal leased from the port of Oakland. In this position I negotiated with the port of Oakland for the facility and also supervised all the operations of the terminal and handling of ships Cargo operations. Retired on Jan 2nd 2001. High School Diploma: 1956 St Andrews High School - Bandra, Bombay, India Bachelor of Arts: Merchant Marine, 1958 Merchant Marine Academy, T.S.Dufferin. - Bombay - India Master of Arts: Masters License, 1964 Ministry of Transportation - Bombay - India 78 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March 23, 2015 Ms. Julie DiMaggio Enea Senior Deputy County Administrator Contra Costa County Administrator’s Office 651 East Pine Street, 10th Floor Martnez CA 94553 Ms. Enea: I wish to be considered for the Public opening of Evaluator of the Proposals for EMS Ambulance service in Contra Costa County. I have been a resident of Contra Costa County since 1970, living in a variety of areas including the Danville/San Ramon area, the Orinda Area, the Central County, and, since 2004 in Brentwood in East County. As shown on the enclosed resume, after a 43-year career with a heavy finance component, I am now retired and heavily engaged in local and regional governance, especially with regards to the Fire service. I have been very active in Fire matters since 2006, beginning with the public hearings on the CityGate report on the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District. I was involved as a member of the public in the 2009 Fire and Emergency Medical Service MSR process at LAFCO, and have attended all the workshops conducted as an offshoot of that review. I was also involved as a member of the public in the discussions at the BOS about giving control of the District to a locally appointed Board of Directors, which culminated in establishment of said Board in February of 2010. I was sworn in as a Director in January of 2013, and currently serve as Director and Chair of the Board’s Finance Committee. In our current campaign to educate the Public on our need to pass a Fire Suppression Benefit Assessment for ECCFPD, I often find myself explaining and defending the role of the Fire Service in Emergency Medical Services. Brentwood, CA 94513-6917 Phone: 79 April 6, 2015 Page 2 An important component of Fire and EMS response is the road network they must use in getting to the scene, especially the Routes of Regional Significance. My service with the Contra Costa Transportation Authority gives me a thorough knowledge of roadway and traffic matters and the unique geography of Contra Costa County. With specific respect to EMS matters and the Ambulance Contract, I have attended the various BOS hearings and workshops associated with the Fitch EMS study. I attended the EMS Ambulance Request For Proposal Development Workshop on September 17th, 2014—contributing my own comments—and the Mandatory Proposer’s Conference on March 19th of this year. With regard to objectivity I, of course, have never been an employee of Contra Costa County or any potential party to the Contract at any time. Further, while deeply involved in Fire matters, I do not currently reside in the CONFIRE Service Area. While Chief Henderson and I are watching developments with great interest, ECCFPD is not a party to the proceeding. In conclusion, I feel that my experience since 2006 in Fire and EMS matters, my local knowledge of most of Contra Costa County, my financial expertise, and my record of public service uniquely qualify me for this appointment. Sincerely, Stephen F. Smith 80 Stephen F. Smith Brentwood, CA 94513-6917 Summary Retired Brentwood resident with recent experience in government service, especially in Fire and EMS matters, seeks position as CCC Ambulance Contract Proposal Evaluator Relevant Skills Fire Service Governance and Administration – EMS administration and protocols – Financial Analysis – Non profit organization, governance, and financial administration – Transportation planning Government and Non Profit Experience January, 2011-present—East Contra Costa Fire Protection District—Director (Also Chair, Finance Committee) May, 2015-present—Brentwood Library Foundation—Treasurer, CFO, and Director April, 2009-present—Cooking With Kids Foundation—Treasurer, CFO, and Director April, 2009-present—Contra Costa Transportation Authority—Member, Citizens Advisory Committee (Committee Chair from May, 2013-present) October, 2006-present—Brentwood Advisory Neighborhood Committee—Member Professional History 1972-2006—Bank Data Processing—Senior Analyst/Programmer/Software Engineer Employee of, or staff of Contractor to, Wells Fargo Bank, Bank of America, Citicorp, Central Bank, Bank of the West. Heavy focus on support of financial reporting in latter stages of career. 1970-1972—National Real Estate Exchange—Director of Systems In charge of all computer functions for entrepreneurial startup company. 1963-1970—University of California, Berkeley—Various Academic Staff Positions Staff positions in computing in several departments, rising from entry-level to Associate Specialist, non-teaching equivalent to Assistant Professor. Education University of California, Berkeley—Bachelor of Science, 1964 Master of Science, 1966 81 INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE 7. Meeting Date:04/13/2015   Subject:ALLOCATION OF FISH & WILDLIFE PROPAGATION FUNDS Department:Conservation & Development Referral No.: IOC 15/6   Referral Name: Allocation of Propagation Funds by the Fish and Wildlife Committee  Presenter: Maureen Parkes, Conservation & Development Dept Contact: Maureen Parkes 925.674.7831  Referral History: On November 22, 2010, the IOC received a status report from Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) regarding the allocation of propagation funds by the Fish and Wildlife Committee (FWC). The IOC accepted the report along with the recommended modifications to improve the grant process in the future. The modifications included (1) updating the FWC Conflict of Interest Code, which was accomplished, and; (2) having the IOC conduct a preliminary review of annual FWC grant recommendations prior to Board of Supervisors review, which is now a standing referral to the IOC.  Referral Update: Attached is a memo describing the outreach and selection process and criteria, and transmitting the grant funding recommendations of the County's Fish & Wildlife Committee for 11 projects. The Fish & Wildlife Committee exercised care in limiting allocations to the direct costs of each project for activities that protect, conserve, propagate, and preserve fish and wildlife. The grant matrix at the back of the transmittal shows each project in summary form, including the amount requested vs. the proposed allocation, the rationale for the FWC's decision, and any limitations on the use of the funds. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): APPROVE recommendations from the Fish & Wildlife Committee for the allocation of 2015 Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund grant funds for 11 projects totaling $61,155. Fiscal Impact (if any): The recommendation will have no impact on the County General Fund. The FWC is proposing to allocate $ 61,155 of the $80,162 propagation funds available as of January 15, 2015. Fish and wildlife propagation funds are restricted to costs for the protection, conservation, propagation, and preservation of fish and wildlife, pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 13100, and are budgeted in the Fish and Game Fund (110200). 82 Attachments Fish & Wildlife Cte Recommendations for Propagation Fund Allocation  83 84 FWC Grant Program The Board has charged the FWC with coordinating a process by which fine money could be appropriately “expended for the protection, conservation, propagation, and preservation of fish and wildlife” [Fish and Game Code 13100]. Since 1996, the FWC has implemented a structured process for reviewing funding requests. The FWC developed a grant application packet (attached), which includes a cover letter to explain the grant process and funding priorities, an application to solicit relevant information about the project, and a copy of the expenditure criteria established by California law for the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund. The FWC continued the third year of expanded outreach to schools with the intent to fund high value, low-cost public education projects related to the scientific principles of fish and wildlife conservation. In October 2014, the application packet was sent to the Fish and Wildlife Committee mailing list, the Contra Costa Watershed Forum mailing list; and the Contra Costa County Office of Education, Contra Costa College, Diablo Valley College and Los Medanos College for distribution to interested teachers and programs that would benefit from the grant program. A press release was distributed to local and regional media outlets regarding the availability of the grant application packet and CCTV publicized it on the CountyNet Bulletin Board which reaches 350,000+ homes in the County. It was also made available on the Committee’s website and to anyone who requested a copy. FWC Grant Review Process in 2015 A total of 15 applications requesting a total of $114,447.66 were received during the application period, which ended January 5, 2015. The Fish and Wildlife Committee discussed the funding of the applications at its January, February and March 2015 meetings. Some applicants came to FWC meetings to talk about their applications during public comment opportunities. The FWC acknowledged the hard work that went into all of the applications received and appreciates the commitment of applicants to improving the resources of the County. II. Recommendation of Funding on Grants for 2015 At the March 18, 2015 meeting, the FWC recommended funding for eleven (11) proposed projects. Projects recommended for funding total $61,155.02 and are geographically located across the County. More details are provided on page six of the attached grant recommendations chart. Six (6) of the recommendations directly benefit public education of students. (see attached chart for more detailed information on all of the applications.) The specific FWC recommendations and the vote of the FWC on these recommendations are listed below. Members in attendance and voting on these items were: Susan Heckly (District II), Brett Morris (District IV), Daniel Pellegrini (District V), Rhonda Gehlke (At-large), Kathleen Jennings (At-large), Jeff Skinner (At-large) and Scott Stephan (At-large). Martha Berthelsen (District I) recused herself from all deliberations at the January and February meetings, citing connections to two of the applications and did not attend the March meeting. All recommendations are for full funding of the project as proposed unless noted otherwise. FWC Recommendations: 1) Appropriate $3,320.00 to SPAWNERS to 1) measure seven different parameters to investigate the health of creeks, and 2) analyze and summarize the data, and 3) to create Page 2 of 4 85 outreach materials in order to teach residents about the water quality monitoring results and to provide tips for improving the creeks' water quality and 4) purchase a new colorimeter. Partial funding is recommended and not to be used for payment to their fiscal sponsor. [7 ayes/0 noes] 2) Appropriate $9,625.00 to Mt. View Sanitary District (MVSD) to support 25 additional Wetlands Field Trips in Contra Costa County, outside of the MVSD service area. The field trip is a 4-hour, hands-on, outdoor education program that provides instruction on pollution prevention and water quality, the value of wetland habitats for people and wildlife, and aquatic animal adaptations. [7 ayes/0 noes] 3) Appropriate $1,645.00 to Mt. View Sanitary District for the purchase of a shed for storage and data collection for the ongoing Western Pond Turtle study in Moorhen Marsh. [7 ayes/0 noes] 4) Appropriate $950.00 to Worth a Dam to fund a K.EY.S.T.O.N.E. (Kids Explore! - Youth Science Training on Natural Ecosystems) activity teaching children about beavers, which will promote the concept of species interdependence; and increases public awareness of working watersheds and beaver function within them. [7 ayes/0 noes] 5) Appropriate $7,058.27 to the Lindsay Wildlife Museum for the purchase of a kitchen sterilizer. Partial funding is recommended due to limited grant funds this year, and awarded funds are to be used only on the kitchen sterilizer. [7 ayes/0 noes] 6) Appropriate $975.00 to the Ruth Bancroft Garden to create and restore wildlife habitat with native vegetation; and to develop educational tools for children at Ruth Bancroft Garden. [7 ayes/0 noes] 7) Appropriate $1,010.00 to Friends of Alhambra Creek to purchase native plants and gardening supplies for maintenance of public gardens on the Alhambra Native Plant Trail and to expand the John Muir National Historic Site Visitor Center garden and other new gardens. Partial funding is recommended and may not be used on rain barrels. [7 ayes/0 noes] 8) Appropriate $8,500.00 to The Regents of the University of California to: 1) survey and monitor native bee populations across diverse natural and constructed landscapes in Brentwood, which will allow them to identify new host plants that could be used to sustain rare bee species found in natural areas, measure the diversity and abundance of local wild bee populations, identify bee-attractive plant types present in natural areas and measure impacts of fires and urban developments on local wild bee populations, and 2) create educational materials. Partial funding is recommended and may not be used for indirect or overhead costs. [7 ayes/0 noes] 9) Appropriate $7,971.75 to the Golden Gate Audubon Society to partially support the purchase of the materials associated with their award-winning Eco-Richmond Program and its new initiative, Bird Friendly Schools including the purchase of native plants, nest box building materials, trash grabbers and observation equipment to be used by 275 3rd-5th grade children from four schools along the North Richmond Shoreline. [7 ayes/0 noes] Page 3 of 4 86 10) Appropriate $10,100.00 to Earth Team to continue building on their after-school watershed internships, which includes: 1) watershed education and stewardship with an emphasis in raising public awareness of litter pollution and storm water issues, 2) environmental monitoring and scientific research at Pinole Creek. Partial funding is recommended and not to be used on staff mileage reimbursement. [7 ayes/0 noes] 11) Appropriate $10,000.00 to East Bay Regional Parks Foundation for funds to serve 40 Contra Costa County low-income students (grades 4-6) and to subsidize five adult teachers and chaperones to attend their Campership Program, which encompasses both summer day camping and an outdoor, residential environmental education camp component. [7 ayes/0 noes] Further, the FWC also recommended that within a year of grant funding approval, or within one month of project completion, whichever comes sooner, recipients must submit a final project report which includes invoices and receipts documenting how funds were spent and the results of the project. Details will be outlined in the grant award packet provided to all successful applicants. [7 ayes/0 noes] Please contact Maureen Parkes at 925-674-7831 or Abigail Fateman at 925-674-7820 with any questions. Attachments: • Grant application packet for Fish and Wildlife Propagation Funds • Chart summarizing the applications and recommendations Page 4 of 4 87 Contra Costa County October 14, 2014 Dear Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund Grant Applicants: The Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Committee is pleased to announce that completed funding applications are now being accepted for consideration for the Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund (Fund). All application materials and guidelines are attached. Proposals must be received by 5:00 p.m. on Monday, January 5, 2015 (a postmark of January 5, 2015, does not satisfy the submission deadline). Proposals may be emailed or mailed. Any applications that are received after the due date or without a signature will not be considered. The recommendations of the Fish and Wildlife Committee will be forwarded to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, which maintains final decision-making authority for expenditures from the Fund. The Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund is entirely supported by fine revenues resulting from violations of the Fish and Game Code and Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations in Contra Costa County (County). Projects awarded from the Fund must benefit the fish and wildlife resources of the County and must meet the requirements of Section 13103 of the Fish and Game Code (attached). All applications that satisfy the requirements listed in the funding application directions will be considered. The Fish and Wildlife Committee strongly encourages applications related to: •improving habitat, •scientific research, and In addition, as a continued, additional focus for 2015, the Fish and Wildlife Committee wishes to fund high value, low-cost public education projects related to the scientific principles of fish and wildlife conservation. The Committee is interested in funding one or more small projects that will benefit the largest possible number of students (e.g. curriculum kits or other tools that have a high likelihood of making a significant impact on a broad audience.) The Fish and Wildlife Committee generally does not recommend funding for operating costs and overhead, such as benefits or utilities. If an hourly rate is listed, costs need to be itemized separately (see grant guidelines for more details). The Committee expects to recommend awards to several applicants. However, it is possible that a particularly excellent proposal will be recommended to receive a large portion of the total available funds. During the 2014 grant cycle a total of $140,605.23 was awarded to 16 projects. The awards ranged from $985 to $40,000. Successful applicants may anticipate receiving notification of funding awards by the late spring or summer of 2015. The grant award funds will be disbursed on a cost reimbursement basis.* (See next page for exceptions.) Within a year of grant funding approval, or within one month of project completion, whichever comes sooner, recipients must submit a final project report which includes invoices and receipts documenting how funds were spent and the results of the project. Fish and Wildlife Propagation fund grants will be disbursed after receipt and approval of the final project report. Details will be outlined in the grant packet to all successful applicants. John Kopchik Interim Director Aruna Bhat Deputy Director Jason Crapo Deputy Director Robert T. Calkins Interim Deputy Director Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Phone: 1-855-323-2626 88 *Exception For Non-Profit Organizations That Can Demonstrate Financial Hardship: Private, non-profit entities that can demonstrate that providing Fish and Wildlife Propagation grant funding on a cost reimbursement basis will create a financial hardship and be detrimental to the operation of the program will be eligible to receive up to ½ of the grant amount after the grant is awarded. The remaining amount of the grant will be disbursed after the entity has submitted information including invoices and receipts documenting how the initial disbursement was spent. Within a year of initial notification of the grant funding award (i.e. spring or summer of 2016), or within one month of project completion, whichever comes sooner, the entity will be required to submit information including invoices and receipts documenting how the second disbursement was spent, and provide a final project report documenting the results of the project. *Exception For Small Projects Under $1,000: Grant funding may be disbursed to private, non-profit entities prior to the beginning of the project if the award is under $1,000 and the entity has provided documentation that the project could only be initiated with advance funding. Within a year of grant funding, or within one month of project completion, whichever comes sooner, recipients must submit a final project report which includes invoices and receipts documenting how funds were spent and the results of the project. The Committee appreciates your interest in this opportunity to improve the fish and wildlife resources in Contra Costa County. Should you have any questions about the Fish and Wildlife Committee or this funding program, please contact Maureen Parkes at 925-674-7831 or maureen.parkes@dcd.cccounty.us. Sincerely, Maureen Parkes Fish and Wildlife Committee Staff 89 INSTRUCTIONS What Must Be Included in Your Proposal (not to exceed 3 pages): 1)Signed Application Cover Page (see attached) 2)Description of the project for which funding is requested. Please include an explanation of: •how this project will benefit the fish and wildlife of Contra Costa County •how this project meets the requirements of Section 13103 of the Fish & Game Code (attached) which defines the eligibility requirements for projects requesting funding from the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund. Indicate which letter(s) of the Section 13103 is/are satisfied. •If your proposal is eligible under Section 13103 (d), (h), (i), or (m), send a copy of your draft proposal a minimum of 30 days prior to the final deadline to the attention of Scott Wilson, Regional Manager, CA Department of Fish and Wildlife, 7329 Silverado Trail, Napa, CA 94558, to request a letter of support. (This letter does not count toward your page limit) 3)Project schedule - The project must be completed within a year from the date you receive notification of funding (by Spring/Summer 2015). 4)Project budget (itemized). The Fish and Wildlife Committee generally does not recommend funding for operating costs and overhead. Examples for these may include benefits such as health insurance, and operation costs such as electricity to run an office. If an hourly rate is listed, overhead costs need to be itemized separately. The Committee generally gives preferences to funding material expenses (e.g. purchase of equipment). 5)Annual budget for the applying organization (not itemized). 6)Statement describing the applying organization, listing the Board of Directors and officers of the organization, and listing all affiliated organizations. 7)Statement describing the qualifications of the sponsoring organization and participating individuals for completing the project. 8)List of individuals responsible for performing project and of individuals responsible for overseeing project. 9)Statement describing the status of permit approvals necessary to perform project (if applicable). 10)Request for an exception to the grant funding cost reimbursement requirement due to financial hardship or an exception for a small project under $1,000. (This request does not count toward your page limit and is only required if requesting an exception.) Format: •Your proposal packet, including cover sheet and any attachments must not exceed four single-sided pages or two double-sided pages, 8.5 by 11 inches in size. Please use 11 point font or larger and ½ inch margins or larger on your pages. If you are including a letter from the CA Department of Fish and Wildlife to demonstrate eligibility under Section 13103 (d), (h), (i) or (m) of the Fish and Game Code, this will not be counted as part of your page limit. Otherwise, if you submit more than 3 pages plus required cover sheet, your proposal may be disqualified without review. •Do not attach an additional cover letter, brochures, posters, publications, CDs, DVDs, large maps or yellow-sticky paper (e.g. Post-ItTM). •Your complete application packet including signature must arrive by 5:00 p.m. on Monday, January 5, 2015 (Pacific Standard Time) to be considered for funding. (Please note: A postmark of January 5, 2015 does not satisfy the submission deadline. If submitted after the deadline, your proposal will be disqualified). Your complete application should be: Emailed: maureen.parkes@dcd.cccounty.us or Mailed: Contra Costa County Fish & Wildlife Committee c/o Contra Costa County Dept. of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553-4601 Attn: Maureen Parkes If you wish to hand deliver, contact Maureen by email or at 925-674-7831. Page 1 of 2 90 Final Checklist Before You Submit Your Proposal: Please note that your proposal will not be considered if you provide more materials than required below: •Signed Cover page (your proposal will be disqualified if it does not have your original signature on the cover page). •3 pages or less on your project description (any extra attachments such as a map and an organization budget will be counted as one of the three page limit.) •Letter from the CA Department of Fish and Wildlife only if your project is under Section 13103 (d), (h), (i), or (m) of the Fish and Game Code. (This is not a part of the page limit listed above). •Request for an exception to the grant funding cost reimbursement requirement due to financial hardship or an exception for a small project under $1,000. (This is not a part of the page limit listed above and is only required if requesting an exception). If you have questions regarding the Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund grant process, please contact Maureen Parkes: maureen.parkes@dcd.cccounty.us / (925) 674-7831. Page 2 of 2 91 13103. Expenditures from the fish and wildlife propagation fund of any county may be made only for the following purposes: (a) Public education relating to the scientific principles of fish and wildlife conservation, consisting of supervised formal instruction carried out pursuant to a planned curriculum and aids to education such as literature, audio and video recordings, training models, and nature study facilities. (b) Temporary emergency treatment and care of injured or orphaned wildlife. (c) Temporary treatment and care of wildlife confiscated by the department as evidence. (d) Breeding, raising, purchasing, or releasing fish or wildlife which are to be released upon approval of the department pursuant to Sections 6400 and 6401 onto land or into waters of local, state, or federal agencies or onto land or into waters open to the public. (e) Improvement of fish and wildlife habitat, including, but not limited to, construction of fish screens, weirs, and ladders; drainage or other watershed improvements; gravel and rock removal or placement; construction of irrigation and water distribution systems; earthwork and grading; fencing; planting trees and other vegetation management; and removal of barriers to the migration of fish and wildlife. (f) Construction, maintenance, and operation of public hatchery facilities. (g) Purchase and maintain materials, supplies, or equipment for either the department's ownership and use or the department's use in the normal performance of the department's responsibilities. (h) Predator control actions for the benefit of fish or wildlife following certification in writing by the department that the proposed actions will significantly benefit a particular wildlife species. (i) Scientific fish and wildlife research conducted by institutions of higher learning, qualified researchers, or governmental agencies, if approved by the department. (j) Reasonable administrative costs, excluding the costs of audits required by Section 13104, for secretarial service, travel, and postage by the county fish and wildlife commission when authorized by the county board of supervisors. For purposes of this subdivision, "reasonable cost" means an amount which does not exceed 3 percent of the average amount received by the fund during the previous three-year period, or three thousand dollars ($3,000) annually, whichever is greater, excluding any funds carried over from a previous fiscal year. (k) Contributions to a secret witness program for the purpose of facilitating enforcement of this code and regulations adopted pursuant to this code. (l) Costs incurred by the district attorney or city attorney in investigating and prosecuting civil and criminal actions for violations of this code, as approved by the department. (m) Other expenditures, approved by the department, for the purpose of protecting, conserving, propagating, and preserving fish and wildlife. 92 Office Use Only: Contra Costa County 2015 Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund Application Cover Page Project title: Organization/Individual applying: (Organization type: please check one – government, non-profit, for-profit, other (explain) Address: Telephone: Fax: E-mail: Name and title of contact person: One sentence summary of proposal: Requested grant: Proposal prepared by (name & title): Signature (Typing your name does not count as a signature. If this section is empty, your proposal will not be considered): ________________________________________________ Signed on _______________ 93 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2015 Page 1 of 6 4/7/2015 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of the Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of the Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation A SPAWNERS non-profit Monitoring Water Quality in the San Pablo Creek Watershed (a) public education (e) habitat improvement West County $3,652.00 $3,320.00 yA request for funding to: 1) measure seven different parameters to investigate the health of creeks, and 2) analyze and summarize the data, and 3) to create outreach materials in order to teach residents about the water quality monitoring results and to provide tips for improving the creeks' water quality. 4) purchase a new colorimeter The project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education and (e) habitat improvement. Partial funding is recommended and not to be used for payment to fiscal sponsor. B Mt. View Sanitary District government Wetlands Field Trip Program for Contra Costa County Schools (a) public education Countywide $9,625.00 $9,625.00 A request for funding to support 25 additional Wetlands Field Trips in Contra Costa County, outside of the MVSD service area. The field trip is a 4-hour, hands-on, outdoor education program that provides instruction on pollution prevention and water quality, the value of wetland habitats for people and wildlife, and aquatic animal adaptations. The project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education, fulfills educational goals of the Committee and increases outreach by providing funds to students outside of the MVSD service area to attend the field trips. C Mt. View Sanitary District government Equipment Shed for Ongoing Moorhen Marsh Western Pond Turtle Study (i) scientific research Central County $1,645.00 $1,645.00 A request for funding to purchase a shed for storage and data collection for the ongoing Western Pond Turtle study in Moorhen Marsh. The project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (i) scientific research. The shed will store equipment for the ongoing research on important wetland dependent species. 94 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2015 Page 2 of 6 4/7/2015 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of the Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of the Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation D Worth a Dam non-profit K.E.Y.S.T.O.N.E (Kids Explore! - Youth Science Training on Natural Ecosystems) (a) public education Central County $950.00 $950.00 A request to fund a K.EY.S.T.O.N.E. (Kids Explore! - Youth Science Training on Natural Ecosystems) activity teaching children about beavers. The project promotes the concept of species interdependence; and increases public awareness of working watersheds and beaver function within them. The project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education and fulfills educational goals of the Committee by providing funds to educate children with a fun activiity that will deepen their awareness of species interdependence. E The Watershed Project non-profit Waste Matters to the Ocean Curriculum (a) public education West County $7,500.00 $0.00 A request for funding to design and print curriculum materials for "Waste Matters To The Ocean", a comprehensive training and education program for grades 1 - 6 to help schools become zero-waste, which includes protocols for waste reduction, reuse, composting and recycling, as well as education about the effects of marine debris on wildlife. Funding is not recommended due to the high cost per workbook and limited resources in the grant fund. F East Bay Regional Park District government Regional Parks Mobile Education Outreach (a) public education Countywide $7,558.00 $0.00 A request to fund an additional 520 hours of work time to their Interpretive Student Aide staff to provide the following in Contra Costa County: • Richmond Shoreline Festival • 24 Mobile Visitor Center school programs • 3 fishing derby presentations • 8 Mobile Fish Exhibit school presentations • 26 program prep days • 26 aquarium maintenance days Funding is not recommended due to concerns about paying employee salaries. 95 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2015 Page 3 of 6 4/7/2015 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of the Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of the Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation G Lindsay Wildlife Museum non-profit Investing in Wildlife Rehabilitation (a) public education (b) Temporary emergency treatment and care of injured or orphaned wildlife. Countywide $20,083.91 $7,058.27 A request for funding to purchase: 1) a commercial dishwasher 2) surgical suite to provide safer, quicker procedures for all of their animal patients 3) veterinary resources - a subscription to The Birds of North America Cornell Ornithology online, renewed subscription to Veterinary Information Network and update some of the text books in their library. The project meets meets the requirements of Section 13103 (b) Temporary emergency treatment and care of injured or orphaned wildlife. Partial funding is recommended due to limited grant funds this year, and awarded funds are to be used on Kitchen Sterilizer (CMA Dishmachine 180UC). H Ruth Bancroft Garden non-profit Garden Wildlife Habitat Restoration (a) public education (e) habitat improvement Central County $975.00 $975.00 A request for funding to create and restore wildlife habitat with native vegetation; and to develop educational tools for children at Ruth Bancroft Garden. The project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education and (e) habitat improvement. The tool kits will give children an opportunity to learn more about the garden and native vegetation will increase the garden's wildlife habitat value. I Raptors are the Solution (RATS) non-profit Raptors Are The Solution: Faces of Rat Poison Public Outreach Campaign (a) public education (m) Other expenditures for the purpose of protecting, conserving, propagating, and preserving fish and wildlife Countywide $11,715.00 $0.00 yA request for funding support to continue their Faces of Rat Poison campaign with public transit PSAs within Contra Costa County. Funding is not recommended because in comparison to the other applications considered, it is not the most efficient use of funds due to the limited short time exposure and the high cost of the public service announcements. 96 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2015 Page 4 of 6 4/7/2015 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of the Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of the Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation J Friends of Alhambra Creek other Alhambra Native Plant Trail (a) public education (e) habitat improvement Central County $1,350.00 $1,010.00 A request for funds to purchase native plants and gardening supplies for maintenance of public gardens on the Alhambra Native Plant Trail and to expand the John Muir National Historic Site Visitor Center garden and other new gardens. The project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education and (e) habitat improvement. Partial funding is recommended and may not be used on rain barrels because of their limited effectiveness in this region and comparison to the benefits of other proposals considered. K The Regents of the University of California public university Bees of Brentwood (a) public education (e) habitat improvement (i) scientific research East County $10,710.00 $8,500.00 A request for funding to: 1) survey and monitor native bee populations across diverse natural and constructed landscapes in Brentwood, which will allow them to identify new host plants that could be used to sustain rare bee species found in natural areas, measure the diversity and abundance of local wild bee populations, identify bee- attractive plant types present in natural areas and measure impacts of fires and urban developments on local wild bee populations. 2) create educational materials The project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education, (e) habitat improvement and (i) scientific improvement. The project will develop high quality native bee habitat in agricultural areas, survey and monitor native bee populations in adjacent urban and natural areas, and provide education, primarily for local schools. Partial funding is recommended and not to be used for indirect or overhead costs. 97 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2015 Page 5 of 6 4/7/2015 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of the Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of the Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation L Golden Gate Audubon Society non-profit Eco-Richmond Program, Bird- Friendly Schools (a) public education (e) habitat improvement West County $7,971.75 $7,971.75 A request for funds to partially support the purchase of the materials associated with their award- winning Eco-Richmond Program and its new initiative, Bird Friendly Schools including the purchase of native plants, nest box building materials, trash grabbers and observation equipment to be used by 275 3rd-5th grade children from four schools along the North Richmond Shoreline. The project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education and (h) habitat improvement fulfilling the educational goals of the Committee by providing holistic lessons related to ecology and stewardship while improving the habitat. M Save Mount Diablo non-profit 2015 Marsh Creek - Morgan Territory Habitat Restoration Project (e) habitat improvement East County $10,000.00 $0.00 A request for funds to support the construction of a water system for conservation grazing, native habitat restoration, protection of Curry Creek by decommissoning a road that is too close to the creek, and mapping and tracking of invasive plant species. Funding is not recommended due to the limited amount of grant funds this year and the benefits of this proposed project are limited compared to other proposals considered. N Earth Team non-profit Sustainable Youth Watershed Internships at the Environmental Science Academy, Pinole Valley High School (a) public education (e) habitat improvement (i) scientific research West County $10,712.00 $10,100.00 A request for funds to continue building on their after-school watershed internships, which includes: 1) watershed education and stewardship with an emphasis in raising public awareness on litter pollution and storm water issues, 2) environmental monitoring and scientific research at Pinole Creek The project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education, (e) habitat improvement and (i) scientific research. Fulfills the educational goals of the Committee, promotes watershed education and stewardship, with an emphasis in raising public awareness of litter pollution and storm water issues. Partial funding is recommended and not to be used on staff mileage reimbursement. 98 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2015 Page 6 of 6 4/7/2015 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of the Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of the Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation O East Bay Regional Parks Foundation non-profit Contra Costa County Youth Environmental Education Camperships (a) public education To be determined - East, West or Central County $10,000.00 $10,000.00 A request for funds to serve 40 Contra Costa County low-income grades 4-6 students and subsidies for five adult teachers and chaperones to attend their Campership Program, which encompasses both summer day camping and an outdoor, residential environmental education camp component. The project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education and fulfills educational goals of the Committee by providing funds to provide low-income students with a fun environmental education summer outdoor camp program. $114,447.66 $61,155.02 $80,162.39 Subtotals by Region Requested Funding Amount Percentage of Total Amount Requested Recommended Funding Amount Percentage of total Amount Recommended for Approval East $24,043.33 21.0%$11,833.33 19.35% West $33,169.08 29.0%$24,725.08 40.43% Central $8,253.34 7.2%$7,913.34 12.94% Countywide $48,981.91 42.8%$16,683.27 27.28% TOTAL $114,447.66 100.0%$61,155.02 100.00% Total Available Funds (as of January 15, 2015) 99 INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE 8. Meeting Date:04/13/2015   Subject:Staff Recommendations for FY 2015/16 & FY 2016/17 CDBG Infrastructure/Public Facilities and Economic Development Categories Submitted For: John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department  Department:Conservation & Development Referral No.:   Referral Name: Presenter: Gabriel Lemus Contact: Gabriel Lemus (925) 674-7882 Referral History: The Finance Committee of the Board of Supervisors reviews the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) recommendations under the Economic Development (ED) and Infrastructure/Public Facilities (IPF) categories. County CDBG staff was informed that the Finance Committee meeting scheduled for April 6, 2015 was cancelled.  As an alternative, CDBG staff consulted with IOC staff and Finance Committee staff to see if the IOC could review the CDBG recommendations under the ED and IPF categories. Both IOC and Finance Committee members agreed that this was an allowable and appropriate alternative. Referral Update: On December 15, 2014, the Department of Conservation and Development received CDBG applications for FY 2015/16. The attached memo, spreadsheets, and staff reports, contain additional background, summary of staff’s recommendations, and analysis of each application under the ED and IPF categories. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): 1. APPROVE recommendations for FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17 Infrastructure/Public Facilities (IPF) projects as recommended by staff or amended by the Committee. 2. APPROVE recommendations for FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17 Economic Development (ED) projects as recommended by staff or amended by the Committee. 3. DIRECT the Department of Conservation and Development to prepare a staff report on the Committee’s recommendations. The staff report will be submitted together with funding recommendations for all other CDBG categories for the Board of Supervisors consideration on May 5, 2015. Fiscal Impact (if any): 100 Fiscal Impact (if any): No General Fund impact. CDBG funds are provided to the County on a formula allocation basis through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Attachments Transmittal of CDBG Funding Recommendations CDBG Economic Development Funding Recommendations CDBG Economic Development Staff Report CDBG Infrastructure/Public Facilities Funding Recommendations CDBG Infrastructure/Public Facilities Staff Report 101 1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Telephone: (925) 674-7877 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 13, 2015 TO: Internal Operations Committee Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, Chair Supervisor John Gioia, Member FROM: Bob Calkins, CDBG Program Manager By: Gabriel Lemus SUBJECT: Staff Recommendations for FY 2015/16 & FY 2016/17 CDBG Infrastructure/Public Facilities and Economic Development Categories BACKGROUND Six applications in the CDBG Economic Development (ED) category and nine applications in the Infrastructure/Public Facilities (IPF) category were submitted by the December 15, 2014 deadline. Available Funding: The County’s FY 2015/16 CDBG grant amount is $2,996,848, which approximately $20,000 more than the County received this year. Over the last two years, the County’s CDBG entitlement allocation has been relatively flat, with no significant increases or decreases to the total entitlement allocation. On November 4, 2014, the Board of Supervisors (Board) adopted new funding guidelines for the allocation of CDBG funds that require the County’s annual grant be allocated to the following CDBG eligible categories: 102 2 Category of Use Previous Guidelines CDBG Program New Guidelines CDBG Program Available Funding Affordable Housing 45.1% 45% $1,348,582 Public Services 15% *17% $ 449,527 Economic Development 14% 10% $ 299,685 Infrastructure/Public Facility 3.9% 8% $ 239,748 Contingency 2% N/A N/A Administration 20% 20% $ 599,370 Total FY 2015/16 CDBG Grant $2,996,848 *As long as the amount does not go over HUD’s statutory cap for Public Services The new funding guidelines were derived as a result of the FY 2015/2020 Consolidated Plan participation process, which included a survey of needs completed by many County residents and representatives of public and private/non-profit agencies. Consultations with various County/City departments and non-profit agencies also took place as part of the Consolidated Plan participation process. The survey results and consultations indicated that there was a need to increase the Infrastructure/Public Facilities category. Many of the infrastructure needs of various communities within the County are due to the age of the infrastructure and are typically within lower-income communities. With the demise of Redevelopment, the opportunities for cities to rehabilitate and improve their infrastructure and public facilities are much more limited. In addition, many non-profit agencies that serve low-income residents are in need of funding to rehabilitate their facilities to provide much more efficient and effective services. The CDBG Consolidated Plan operates under a five-year period. In October 2013, the Board approved having two separate and distinct funding cycles for the non-housing categories of the CDBG Program to align with the five-year period of the Consolidated Plan. The first cycle is a two-year funding cycle for programs/projects in the CDBG public service, economic development, and infrastructure/public facilities categories. The second cycle is a three-year funding cycle to conclude the final three years of a five-year Consolidated Plan period. Infrastructure and Public Facility Category: Nine applications were received by the application deadline requesting a total of $332,653. Staff recommends six projects to be funded for FY 2015/16 and three projects to be funded for FY 2016/17 at the amounts indicated on Attachment A. Consequently, there is $23,723 unallocated in the IPF category to fund projects in other categories for FY 2015/16. Staff recommends allocating all $23,723 to projects in the Public Services category for FY 2015/16. This will ensure that all of the available CDBG funds are allocated to eligible projects carried out during FY 2015/16. Although CDBG staff is recommending three projects for FY 2016/17, staff recommends issuing a Request for Proposal (RFP) later this year for IPF projects to be carried out in FY 2016/17 provided the County receives CDBG funds in FY 2016/17. Economic Development Category: Consistent with Board of Supervisor funding guidelines, a total of $299,304 (10 percent of the County’s grant amount) is available for ED projects. In addition, there is $5,951 available to be recaptured from completed/closed ED projects. Therefore, a total of $305,636 is 103 3 available for eligible ED projects in FY 2015/16. Staff recommends allocating the amounts indicated in Attachment B to ED projects. Application Process and Evaluation Criteria: Each applicant was required to submit an application describing the proposed project, need and target population, steps necessary to carry out the project, and proposed budget. Applications are reviewed by staff for completeness and eligibility and against criteria listed below. Applicants are also interviewed by staff to respond to or clarify any issues related to the application. Below are the general criteria used by staff in evaluating applications: Intended purpose (outcome) - The quantitative and qualitative goals of the project are achievable, measurable and result in a desirable outcome. Consistency with Priorities Established in the Consolidated Plan and County Policy – The project meets goals and strategies of the Consolidated Plan. Secondarily, the project meets goals of other plans such as Redevelopment Agency Plans, Capital Improvement Plans, community planning documents, etc. Eligibility in Respect to Federal Regulation – The proposed use of CDBG funds is consistent with federal regulations and is determined to be an eligible activity. The project meets one of the following three national objectives: benefit to very-low and low-income persons, preventing blight, or emergency need. Target Population and Demonstrated Need – The project fulfills a well-defined need and has supporting documentation that the need exists. The proposed project is responsive to the community and the target population, and shows a relationship between the need and the action to be taken. The target population or area is clearly defined, the project is accessible and outreach is effective. Financial Analysis - Total project costs are reasonable, and are adequate to carry out the project through the specified time period. The budget is well thought out with reasonable assumptions for completing the project with federal funding. A reasonable relationship exists between the cost of the project and the expected outcome. Sponsor has the capacity to secure all funds necessary to carry out the project within normal standards. Volunteer or in-kind services are attainable and realistic. The project cost is within normal range of similar projects. Projects are required to supply matching funds in order to maximize the use of CDBG funds. Audits or other financial statements demonstrate success in securing funds through grant proposals or other fund raising efforts. Experience and Capacity to Carry out the Project – Components of the project are fully described and goals and objectives are attainable. The project sponsor has demonstrated the ability to successfully carry out the proposed project including providing a project manager, construction manager and/or qualified licensed contractor. The applicant demonstrates that capacity exists to complete the project and meet all the federal requirements of the CDBG program. Project Readiness and Timeliness – All components of the project are in place or can be in place within a specified period of time. Project can be implemented and completed in a timely manner. Particular attention is given to these criteria due to specific HUD timeliness requirements. Past Performance - Rate of progress toward completing contractual goals, ability to overcome and avoid 104 4 past problems. Inaccurate or incomplete performance reports, unresolved audit findings, delays in or failure to submit required reports, persistent difficulties with payment request process, failure to correct significant problems. Environmental, Historic Preservation, Relocation, and/or Prevailing Wage Issues – Identification of federal requirements that may be imposed on the project that require specific action to be taken. Clarity and completeness of application - The application submitted was complete and lacked inaccuracies and ambiguities. Public Hearing and Transmittal of Recommendations: The Committee’s recommendations will be forwarded to the full Board of Supervisors prior to the public hearing that is scheduled for May 5, 2015. Final recommendations must be forwarded to the Department of Housing and Urban Development by May 15, 2015 for review to ensure consistency with federal regulation. Attachments cc: John Kopchik, Conservation and Development Director 105 Community Development Block Grant Economic Development Category FY 2015/16 and 2016/17 ATTACHMENT B Project Name Amount Requested Amount Received FY 2014/15 County Staff Rec. for FY 2015/16 Antioch Concord Pittsburg Richmond WC 15-01-ED Contra Costa Child Care Council Road to Success Microenterprise growth and assistance for 100 FCCH child care providers. $70,000 $70,000 $56,000 $15,000 $25,000 $25,000 $10,000 $131,000 $289,651 45% 15-02-ED Open Opportunities, Inc Future Build Pre- Apprenticeship Training Program Train 8 pre-apprentices in solar, energy, and construction trades. $9,640 N/A $9,636 $19,280 $4,802 $19,280 $52,998 $349,596 15% 15-03-ED Opportunity Junction Job Training and Placement Program Provide 10 participants with job training, support services and job placement. $100,000 $100,000 $85,000 $100,000 $21,000 $55,000 $261,000 $853,855 31% 15-04-ED San Pablo Economic Development Corporation SMaRT Program: Social Media Resource Training for Small Business & Workforce Provide 24 participants with social media marketing technical training. $40,000 N/A $0 $0 $70,985 % 15-05-ED The Stride Center Tech Job Training/Job Placement Program Job training and placement assistance in IT for 10 participants. $50,000 $45,000 $40,000 $40,000 $180,000 22% 15-06-ED West Contra Costa Business Development Center, Inc Strengthening Neighborhood Economies Provide technical assistance, training, capital, and incubator services for 60 clients. $96,500 $90,000 $65,000 $65,000 $254,000 26% 15-07-ED Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa County Small Business Development Center (SBDC) Small business training for 50 clients.$80,000 $61,571 $50,000 $15,000 $30,000 $22,500 $22,500 $30,000 $170,000 $400,000 43% $446,140 $366,571 $305,636 $149,280 $80,802 $121,780 $22,500 $40,000 $860,502 $2,398,087 36% Economic Development Projects % Budget (CDBG) Total Budget Total CDBG Contra Costa County Amount Requested (Other CDBG Jurisdictions) CCC Project No.OutcomeApplicant 106 FY 2015/16 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (ED) CATEGORY APPLICANT: Contra Costa Child Care Council PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Road to Success 15-01-ED PROJECT SERVICE AREA: Urban County (with emphasis on North Richmond, San Pablo, Rodeo, Crockett, El Sobrante, Bay Point, Brentwood and Pacheco) PROJECT OUTCOME: Provide recruitment, training, and ongoing support services to 100 low- and moderate-income persons so they can sustain their licensed family day care business or receive a childcare license to open and operate a new licensed family daycare business (microenterprise). TOTAL PROJECT COST: $289,651 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $70,000 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: FY 2015/16: $56,000 FY 2016/17: $56,000 RECEIVED IN FY 2014/15: $70,000 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The CDBG contract will be a “pay per accomplishment” contract for FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17, in which most of the CDBG funds will be contingent with the Contra Costa Child Care Council’s pe rformance in meeting their contractual goal. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ANALYSIS: The Contra Costa Child Care Council (Council) has over 30 years of experience developing and improving the quality of family childcare in the County. The Council’s mission is to provide leadership to promote and advance quality care and early education. The Council will provide technical assistance and training opportunities including basic business skill training in marketing, book-keeping, contracting, and business taxes to clients who are interested in developing micro-enterprises as a Family Day Care Provider. Business-specific training including childcare licensing requirements, working effectively with parents, and childcare curricula is also provided. Post-licensing 107 technical assistance, a minimum of 12 hours, focuses on the business aspects of operating a family childcare business aimed at sustaining or expanding the micro- enterprise. Assistance will focus on marketing, record keeping, taxes, child development training workshops, and on-site visits. This program has received CDBG funding since FY 1997/98. Over the many years with CDBG funding, the Council had focused to assist low-income persons obtain a childcare license to open and operate a new child care business within their homes. However, with the economic realities still facing the various communities of the County, the focus of the Council’s program will shift more to the need of sustaining the existing family childcare businesses that were previously created while continuing efforts to assist in the development of newly licensed family childcare businesses. This approach will help protect the childcare business’s investment in their business start-up costs, work with and adjust to fewer resources, and maximize dollars to serve more clients in need of economic development and microenterprise assistance. This shift in focus will have the Council assist 92 existing childcare businesses/microenterprises and create 8 new licensed childcare businesses/microenterprises. To assist in retaining quality providers, the Council will perform the following:  Provide ongoing technical assistance and support to licensed former participants  Conduct four training workshops covering topics such as discipline, complying with ADA, age-appropriate activities and serving children of different ages  Sponsoring an annual conference incorporating workshops on a wide range of child development topics  Distribute “tip sheets” on a wide range of health, safety and child development topics Specific strategies to help maintain sustainable family childcare microenterprises will include: 1) assisting childcare businesses to better market their services (business cards, brochures, flyers, web sites, networking, attending community events); 2) advising and assisting participants to do market research to make good business decisions and implement better business practices like competitive pricing and more flexible hours (expand hours of operation); and, 3) increasing their business practices and childcare services that are culturally sensitive and offer more quality care and early education. The Council will recruit potential participants in the following ways:  Distribute posters in targeted neighborhoods, and seek referrals from community groups. Outreach will be done in several languages including Spanish and Farsi  Distribute recruitment notices to CalWorks participants through the Employment and Human Services Department 108  Conduct three Business Start-up workshops each month  Conduct three “Learning Through Play” workshops each month that provide a basic overview of child growth and development, caring for groups of children and developmentally-appropriate activities for young children  Perform site visits to potential client’s homes to assess the home’s potential for a family day care business The program is eligible, feasible, timely, and consistent with Consolidated Plan goals to foster micro-enterprise development. The Council has been successful in reaching quantitative goals to assist clients to open their business as licensed childcare providers and to provide technical assistance to existing licensed providers. The amount of CDBG funds available for ED activities is lower for FY 2015/16 than the current fiscal year; therefore, all currently funded ED programs are having funding reduced for the next fiscal year. EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATED PLAN PRIORITY: Economic Development: Reduce the number of persons below the poverty level, expand economic opportunities for very low- and low-income residents and increase the viability of neighborhood commercial areas [CD-5]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBLE ACTIVITY: Microenterprise and small business assistance [24 CFR 570.201(o)] 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Benefiting very low- and low-income persons [24 CFR 570.208(a)(2)(iii)] 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: The program is intended to provide low- and moderate-income persons with an opportunity to maintain or start a microenterprise as a licensed in-home childcare provider. Participants in the program are provided with classes that introduce them to basic business strategies and skills to establish, maintain, and grow their business. While the program is available County-wide, the program is targeted to communities that are both economically depressed and/or have the greatest shortage of childcare supply, specifically North Richmond, San Pablo, Rodeo/Crockett, El Cerrito, and El Sobrante in West County; Brentwood and Bay Point in East County, and Pacheco in Central County. The business of family childcare offers a unique opportunity for persons to develop their own small businesses in their own homes. A career in family childcare can allow a person to stay home with their own children and still earn money to support their families. Furthermore, given the dramatic need for 109 childcare, including affordable childcare, in the County, family childcare is a career which offers stable employment. According to the 2010 Child Care Portfolio, published by the California Child Care Resource and Referral Network, the supply of licensed childcare in Contra Costa County continues to decline by an average of 2%, with the most dramatic decline in availability being for school-age children. The new data also documents that 68% of children ages 0-12 have parents in the labor force, which exceeds the states average of 64%. Contra Costa has also experienced a dramatic and alarming increase (25%) in the number of children ages 0-5 living in poverty. As families struggle to make ends meet, childcare costs continue to consume about 20% (per child) of the wages for a parent earning $42,000 per year. The average cost of childcare for infants/toddlers (under the age of two) in child care Centers ranges from $1,200 to $1,600 per month. Additional data shows that childcare is a great way of providing adequate revenue for childcare business owners. Target communities including North Richmond, San Pablo, and Bay Point, also have high levels of unemployment and underemployment. The project has a secondary benefit in that it increases the availability of childcare for others entering the workforce in the targeted communities, which is often cited as one of the barriers to employment. 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: # Clients Served $ Per Client Served CDBG Funds Recommended $56,000 100 $560 Total Program Amount $289,651 216 $1,341 CDBG % of Total Budget 19% Required Match – 50% $28,000 Amount Secured $144,651 Leverage* $4.79 *Does not include other CDBG funds from other jurisdictions. The CDBG funds will be used to pay for staff costs, including taxes/benefits. In addition to CDBG funds from other jurisdictions, the remainder of the program budget is primarily funded by the State Department of Education. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: The Council has been providing assistance to childcare providers and parents since 1976 and first received CDBG funds in FY 1996/97 to deliver services to assist childcare providers to maintain their license. Since FY 1997/98 the Council has received CDBG funding to implement the “Road to Success” program and has been successful in meeting and exceeding goals. The Council has also submitted required reports in a timely manner. The Council’s 110 Resource and Referral Counselors have several years of professional experience in the field of family day care and are well qualified to administer and carry out the program. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: This is an ongoing program that is fully staffed. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: The Council has demonstrated the ability to complete and exceed programmatic objectives in past program years. As of the 2nd quarter for the current fiscal year, the program has assisted 78 Urban County residents open and/or maintain a family daycare business or maintain their current business. For the most recent completed fiscal year (2013/2014), the Council fell short of their goal of assisting 40 new childcare providers, but still provided 151 businesses assistance, beating their overall assistance goal of 100. As with all programs that are recommended CDBG funds under the Economic Development category, CDBG staff is recommending a “pay per accomplishment” contract with the Council for FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17, in which most of the CDBG funds will be contingent on the Council’s performance in meeting their contractual goal. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: None. 111 FY 2015/16 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (ED) CATEGORY APPLICANT: Open Opportunities, Inc. PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Future Build Pre-Apprenticeship Training Program 15-02-ED PROJECT SERVICE AREA: East County PROJECT OUTCOME: To provide training in the solar, energy, and construction trades to 8 low-income persons that leads to economic self-sufficiency through careers in the construction/labor fields. TOTAL PROJECT COST: $349,596 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $9,640 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED FY 2015/16: $9,636 FY 2016/17: $9,636 RECEIVED IN FY 2014/15: N/A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The CDBG contract will be a “pay per accomplishment” contract for FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17 , in which most of the CDBG funds will be contingent on Open Opportunity’s performance on meeting their contractual goal. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ANALYSIS: Open Opportunities Inc.’s Future Build Program, started in 2010, is a pre-apprenticeship training program for low-income unemployed or underemployed individuals motivated to increase their self-sufficiency, income, and employment options. Classroom instruction and hands-on training is provided over 16 weeks to two cohorts of around 20 trainees each spring and summer. The program maintains a hands-on training facility in Pittsburg and classroom instruction is provided at the Adult Education Center in Pittsburg. The program is focused on training in the solar, energy, and construction trades with 100 percent of program graduates being qualified for apprenticeships in County unions. In addition to the classroom instruction and hands-on training, trainees complete community service construction projects in public parks and facilities of East County. Future Build’s curriculum is based on two U.S. Department of Labor-recognized pre- apprenticeship instruction methods: the Home Builders Institute’s “Pre-Apprenticeship Certificate Training” (PACT) and the Building Trades Council’s “Multi Craft Core Curriculum” (MC3). PACT combines work-based learning with vocational and academic instruction. PACT utilizes a construction project to teach jobsite experience, where trainees can apply concepts introduced in the classroom. A Skill Achievement Record is used to track and document student progress through the PACT curriculum. According 112 to Future Build, PACT and MC3 provide trainees with a self-gratifying, hands-on method that increases their likelihood of completing the program, gain the skills needed to enter the workforce, and maintain a career in construction. Future Build maintains relationships with local unions that provide additional apprentice- level training to program graduates. In addition, the program monitors graduates for a minimum of 120 days after course completion in order to assess their progress in obtaining and retaining employment in the construction fields or further training. Future Build staff can provide case management on an as-needed basis to guide their graduates into stable employment or further specialist training. Additionally, the program provides a local access point for developers and construction companies looking to fill entry-level positions, including contractors looking to hire locally for government contract work. Open Opportunities proposes to train and place 4 Urban County trainees per cohort per year into the construction/solar/energy trades for a total of 8 Urban County participants per year. There is a strong need for training and placement services in East County. The program is eligible, feasible, timely, and consistent with the Consolidated Plan goals to provide job training and economic opportunities to lower-income persons. EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATED PLAN PRIORITY: Economic Development: Reduce the number of persons below the poverty level, expand economic opportunities for very low- and low-income residents and increase the viability of neighborhood commercial areas [CD-5]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBLE ACTIVITY: Job training and placement assistance provided by a Community-Based Development Organization (CBDO) [24 CFR 570.204(a)(2)]. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Benefiting very low- and low-income persons [24 CFR 570.208(a)(2)(i)(B)]. 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: The target population being served by the Future Build program is low-income unemployed, underemployed or displaced workers at least 18 years old from East Contra Costa County. According to Future Build, poverty rates are above 10 percent in Antioch, Concord, and Pittsburg. Further, this past year 26% of Future Build's trainees were ex- offenders, demonstrating the need for workforce development programs that bring people out of poverty and the cycles of crime that can accompany poverty. Future Build works with people that want, “to be re-engaged in the community, including their families, educational institutions and employment.” Most of Future Build’s trainees are young men of color but the program encourages female applicants and any unemployed person seeking to re-enter the workforce. 113 According to Open Opportunities, over 76 percent of their graduates enter employment, at an average wage of $15.68 per hour. 55 percent of Future Build's graduates are employed in the construction trades and 90 percent of Future Build's trainees graduate with a PACT issued by the nationally-recognized Home Builder's Institute. According to a report issued by the Workforce Development Board and East Bay Economic Development Alliance, “Construction is highly concentrated in the East Bay and is likely to grow rapidly as the economy rebounds.” As an example, Future Build cites the State’s Employment Development Department finding that Contra Costa's demand for pipe layers is going to grow by 40% in the coming years. Additionally, the planned expansion of BART further into East County will require a considerable amount of apprentices, half of whom will need to be East County residents. Further, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has called for increased hiring of workers that are historically underrepresented in the building trades. The Contra Costa Building and Trades Council also reported that many unions were having trouble finding people for their apprenticeships. The Future Build program is designed to train and place graduates directly into jobs/apprenticeships, satisfying a need for workforce reintegration for the trainees and the employment needs of construction companies and unions. In addition to the above, Future Build works with Contra Costa County public and private agencies that receive AB109 funding to provide rehabilitation services to offenders who are newly released from correctional facilities. AB109 seeks alternative options and services within communities that could stabilize these offenders as they will be closer to home, family and can possibly keep working as they go through community corrections programs. Future Build provides this opportunity through job training, soft skills development and job placement. They have a 90 percent success rate in placing AB109 clients who graduate Future Build in jobs that pay prevailing wages, within the union trades and the solar and construction industry. 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: # Clients Served $ Per Client Served CDBG Funds Recommended $9,636 8 $1,205 Total Program Amount $349,596 44 $7,945 CDBG % of Total Budget 3% Required Match – 10% $964 Amount Secured $285,895 Leverage* $36.26 *Does not include CDBG funds from other jurisdictions 114 The proposed operating budget anticipates grants from a number of foundations and corporations and $200,000 from the Workforce Development Board . Open Opportunities is also applying for CDBG funding from Antioch, Concord, and Pittsburg. The County’s CDBG funds would primarily be used for laborers certificate training instruction. The amount of CDBG funds available for ED activities is lower for FY 2015/16 than the current fiscal year; therefore the CDBG program cannot support new programs at the full level of their request without negatively impacting the funding levels of other ED programs. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: Open Opportunities’ Future Build Program was started in 2010 in partnership with the Pittsburg Power Company (PPC), Contra Costa Workforce Development Board, Pittsburg Adult Education Center, Contra Costa Building and Construction Trades Council, Morris Carey of “On the House”, and Northern California Laborers Training. Program staff have been with the project since its inception and are committed to the program’s mission and goals. The program administrator has decades of experience in youth programs, community- building, and counseling. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: This is an ongoing program that is fully staffed. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: This is the first time Open Opportunities Inc. has applied for CDBG funding. However, the Future Build Program is fully operational and has a track record of training at least 8 Urban County residents each year. Last year, 38 trainees graduated from the program, including 9 Urban County residents. As with all programs that are recommended CDBG funds under the “Economic Development” category, CDBG staff is recommending a “pay per accomplishment” contract with Open Opportunities for FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17, in which most of the CDBG funds will be contingent on Open Opportunity’s performance in meeting their contractual goal. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: None. 115 FY 2015/16 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (ED) CATEGORY APPLICANT: Opportunity Junction PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Job Training and Placement Program 15-03-ED PROJECT SERVICE AREA: Primarily East County PROJECT OUTCOME: To provide training and job placement assistance to 10 low-income persons that leads to economic self- sufficiency through careers in the field of information technology. TOTAL PROJECT COST: $853,855 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $100,000 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: FY 2015/16: $85,000 FY 2016/17: $85,000 RECEIVED IN FY 2014/15: $100,000 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The CDBG contract will be a “pay per accomplishment” contract for FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17 , in which most of the CDBG funds will be contingent on Opportunity Junction’s performance for meeting their contractual goal. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ANALYSIS: Opportunity Junction’s job training and placement program will expand economic opportunities for 10 low-income persons through training and career development in the field of information technology. Opportunity Junction proposes to provide a 12-week program that has two components – Life Skills and Hard Skills. Life Skills training addresses values, attitudes and change, family management, communication, diversity and customer service, stress management, and conflict resolution. Hard Skills training includes keyboarding, word processing, spreadsheet applications, database design and management, business writing and math, desktop publishing, and internet design. After training is complete, participants receive up to four months of paid on-site training on the Opportunity Junction work floor to gain real world job experience. Once participants are ready to leave the work floor, they are provided with job placement assistance. In order to ensure that students acquire on-the-job experience, Opportunity Junction has established partnership agreements with some local agencies and companies to create employment opportunities for students. Participants are also provided case management and retention services to assist them in maintaining 116 employment. Follow-up services include mentoring, assistance with transitional issues, and an alumni club. Participants are tracked and supported for up to 18 months. There is a strong need for training and placement services in East County. The program is eligible, feasible, timely, and consistent with the Consolidated Plan goals to provide job training and economic opportunities to lower-income persons. The amount of CDBG funds available for ED activities is lower for FY 2015/16 than the current fiscal year; therefore, all currently funded ED programs are having funding reduced for the next fiscal year. EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATED PLAN PRIORITY: Economic Development: Reduce the number of persons below the poverty level, expand economic opportunities for very low- and low-income residents and increase the viability of neighborhood commercial areas [CD-5]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBLE ACTIVITY: Job training and placement assistance provided by a Community-Based Development Organization (CBDO) [24 CFR 570.204(a)(2)]. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Benefiting very low- and low-income persons [24 CFR 570.208(a)(2)(i)(B)]. 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: The program will expand economic opportunities for 10 low-income persons through job training and career development in the field of information technology. Persons with barriers to employment are underemployed or are Welfare to Work clients that have limited opportunities to secure jobs that pay a livable wage or allow for career development and advancement. The target population is unemployed or underemployed Urban County residents in East Contra Costa County. Approximately 21% of families in the cities of Brentwood and Oakley are not economically self-sufficient. According to the State’s Economic Development Labor Market Information (EDD LMI), 21.5% of Bay Point residents are unemployed, along with 17.5% of Pittsburg residents and 12.4% of Antioch residents. Furthermore, the EDD LMI estimates that from 2008-2018, there will be more than 25,000 East Bay job openings in administrative occupations that pay a living wage and yet do not require a 4-year college education. Opportunity Junction has established relationships with Pittsburg Adult Education Center and the County Employment and Human Services Department, as well as community based organizations to reach the target population. In order to attract participants, Opportunity Junction staff will hold information workshops about the program at the Opportunity Junction office and at One Stop offices. Additional outreach will be done at the CalWORKS offices in Antioch and through information flyers that are sent to various non-profits and governmental referring partners. The potential for jobs in this area supports the relevance of the training and the opportunities to secure employment. 117 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: # Clients Served $ Per Client Served CDBG Funds Recommended $85,000 10 $8,500 Total Program Amount $853,855 40 $21,346 CDBG % of Total Budget 10% Required Match – 50% $42,500 Amount Secured $144,917 Leverage* $9.04 *Does not include CDBG funds from other jurisdictions The proposed operating budget anticipates grants from a number of foundations and corporations. Opportunity Junction is also applying for CDBG funding from Antioch, Concord, and Pittsburg. The County’s CDBG funds would primarily be used for rent. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: Opportunity Junction was established in 1999 (as Opportunities for Technology Information Careers) by a consortium of private businesses, local government agencies, and community-based organizations and has placed many Urban County participants into permanent employment paying an average of $27,000 annually plus benefits. Program staff has been with the organization for many years and have exhibited exemplary performance in operating this program for many years. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: This is an ongoing program that is fully staffed. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: Opportunity Junction has demonstrated the ability to complete and exceed programmatic objectives within the program year. For FY 2013/14 the program placed 16 Urban County residents in jobs, exceeding their contractual goal. To date, Opportunity Junction has trained and placed seven low- income Urban County residents in jobs. As with all programs that are recommended CDBG funds under the Economic Development category, CDBG staff is recommending a “pay per accomplishment” contract with Opportunity Junction for FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17, in which most of the CDBG funds will be contingent on Opportunity Junction’s performance for meeting their contractual goal. Opportunity Junction has been timely in submitting all necessary quarterly reports. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: None. 118 FY 2015/16 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (ED) CATEGORY APPLICANT: San Pablo Economic Development Corporation PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: SMaRT: Social Media Resource Training for Small Business 15-04-ED PROJECT SERVICE AREA: West County (with emphasis in North Richmond, San Pablo, Rodeo and Crockett) PROJECT OUTCOME: To provide technical assistance and support to 24 existing low-income businesses in social media marketing. TOTAL PROJECT COST: $73,385 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $40,000 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: FY 2015/16: $0 FY 2016/17: $0 RECEIVED IN FY 2014/15: N/A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: N/A PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ANALYSIS: The San Pablo Economic Development Corporation’s (SPEDC) Social Media Resource Training for Small Business (SM ART) program is a ‘micro-enterprise, technical assistance’ program designed to educate qualified low-income small businesses in social media marketing. The SPEDC will use SMART to ‘train small businesses to appropriately assess their resources, needs and feasible projects, while also supplying them with a workforce client capable of completing the project for them.’ SPEDC believes SMART will provide the knowledge for small businesses to survive in increasingly competitive markets, using tools that allow them to better market themselves with the limited resources they have. SMART provides a benefit for two distinct populations. It provides businesses needing marketing assistance as case studies for the SPEDC’s workforce development training program, which supplies participants who are learning skills in information technology. For the purposes of CDBG funding, SPEDC is applying for funds for the training of small businesses, not the workforce clients. 119 SPEDC is proposing to partner with Lao Family Community Development to provide case management for the small businesses that would like on-the-job training in social media marketing after they have completed the initial training. The amount of CDBG funds available for ED programs is lower for FY 2015/16 than the current fiscal year; therefore, the CDBG Program cannot support funding new program at this time without negatively impacting the funding levels of other ED programs. EVAULATION CRITERIA: 1. CONSOLIDATED PLAN PRIORITY: Economic Development: Reduce the number of persons below the poverty level, expand economic opportunities for very low-and low-income residents and increase the viability of neighborhood commercial areas [CD-5]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBLE ACTIVITY: Micro-enterprise and small business assistance [24 CFR 570.201(o)]. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Benefiting very low- and low-income persons/micro- enterprise activity [24 CFR 570.208(a)(2)(iii)]. 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: SMART will target small businesses with extremely low-, very low-, low- or moderate-income owners. They will also focus on targeting businesses (with two or more employees) that currently do not have the resources to strategically or operationally address their marketing needs. SMART will focus their outreach primarily in West County, but intends to have at least 10 percent of program participants come from Central and East County. In total, SMART proposes to serve 24 Urban County clients. In West County, it is estimated that one out of five people lack a high school degree. More alarming is that the unemployment rate in some West County neighborhoods is at or above 20 percent. SMART will work to facilitate new economic opportunities for low-income persons through successful small business/microenterprise training in social media marketing. The need for small business/microenterprise assistance has been well documented. Studies have shown that a large percentage of small businesses and microenterprises fail within the first five years of start-up due to a lack of supportive services. Recent research identified over 3,000 micro-enterprises in West County. These businesses play a significant role in the economy and create a significant number of jobs. Business development is a critical ingredient in attaining financial security and small business creation is a mechanism for economic mobility, particularly for minorities, immigrants, and the economically disadvantaged. 120 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: # Clients Served $ Per Client Served CDBG Funds Recommended $0 24 $N/A Total Program Amount $73,385 48 $1,528.85 CDBG % of Total Budget 0% Required Match – 50% $N/A Amount Secured $33,385 Leverage* $N/A *Does not include other CDBG funds from other jurisdictions. The SMART Program is currently not in operation and is seeking CDBG funds to start the program. SPEDC has requested $40,000 in CDBG funds, which is over 54% of the program’s total budget. The amount of CDBG funds available for ED activities is lower for FY2015/16 then the current fiscal year; therefore the CDBG program cannot support funding brand new programs at this time without negatively impacting the funding levels of other ED programs even more than they are currently being impacted. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: The SPEDC has been in operation for five years. The current Executive Director has managed the SPEDC over the past five years and has significant experience in public sector administration. The SPEDC has qualified staff and uses specialized consultants to assist in delivering services. However, this would be the first year the SMART program would be in operation. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: This is a proposed project by the SPEDC and is currently in the programmatic planning phase. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: The SMART Program is currently not in operation. This is the first year the SPEDC has applied for CDBG funds. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORICAL PERSERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: None 121 FY 2015/16 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (ED) CATEGORY APPLICANT: The Stride Center PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Technical Job Training and Job Placement 15-05-ED PROJECT SERVICE AREA: West County PROJECT OUTCOME: To provide job training and placement assistance to 10 low-income persons that leads to economic self- sufficiency through careers in the field of information technology. TOTAL PROJECT COST: $180,000 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $50,000 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: FY 2015/16: $40,000 FY 2016/17: $40,000 RECEIVED IN FY 2014/15: $45,000 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Stride Center’s CDBG contract will be a “pay per accomplishment” contract, in which most of the CDBG funds will be contingent with Stride Center’s performance for meeting its contractual goal. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ANALYSIS: Stride Center’s program will expand economic opportunities for 10 low-income persons through training and career development in the field of information technology. Stride Center proposes to provide technical job training, professional and career development skills, and one-on-one job placement assistance through a four component program: 1) education and credential; 2) equipment; 3) experience; and 4) placement assistance. Through the education and credential component students go through three to six month training sessions that meet three to five days a week to acquire high-quality technical skills, industry-recognized certifications, and professional, life and career development skills. Students who do not have computer equipment or cannot afford computer equipment can acquire (at no cost) the computer equipment needed for specific training to be carried outside of Stride Center’s classrooms. Students are trained to refurbish computers that they will eventually use for their training. This ensures that no participant is denied access to technology because of lack of equipment or training. The experience component is aimed at creating opportunities for work experience through two social venture programs for students to engage in paid and 122 unpaid internship programs or for graduates to be hired as part-time or full-time staff. Once students complete the necessary program components they move to the final placement assistance component. One-on-one job placement assistance is provided to students to help them find employment that matches their skills. In order to ensure that students acquire on-the-job experience, Stride Center has established partnership agreements with some local agencies and companies to create internship opportunities for students. In addition to the internship agreements, Stride Center has various hiring partners, such as CBX Technologies, Opportunities Exchange West, and Sybase, to ensure and secure technical jobs for their graduates. Furthermore, Stride Center has two social ventures of their own, Relia Tech and ReUse Tech, that provide technical jobs and internship opportunities for their students and graduates. There is a strong need for training and placement services in West County. The program is eligible, feasible, timely, and consistent with the Consolidated Plan goals to provide job training and economic opportunities to lower income persons. The amount of CDBG funds available for ED activities is lower for FY 2015/16 than the current fiscal year; therefore, all currently funded ED programs are having funding reduced for the next fiscal year. EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATED PLAN PRIORITY: Economic Development: Reduce the number of persons below the poverty level, expand economic opportunities for very low- and low-income residents and increase the viability of neighborhood commercial areas [CD-5]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBLE ACTIVITY: Special Economic Activities: Job training and placement assistance [24 CFR 570.203(C)]. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Benefiting very low- and low-income persons [24 CFR 570.208(a)(2)(i)(B)]. 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: As proposed, the program will expand economic opportunities for 10 low income persons through job training and career development in the field of information technology. Stride Center is located in West Contra Cost County, where it is estimated that one out of five people lacks a high school degree and unemployment has reached nearly 20 percent. Persons who have barriers to employment typically are underemployed and have limited opportunities to secure jobs that pay a livable wage or allow for career development and advancement. According to the Department of Labor Statistics, computer support specialist jobs are expected to grow faster than average through the year 2014 and these jobs are projected to stay as a fast-growing industry in the economy. Median earnings for this particular field are currently over $40,000. 123 The target population is unemployed or underemployed Urban County residents in West Contra Costa County. In order to attract participants, Stride Center will advertise in local newspapers and newsletters, deliver course enrollment materials to Career Centers in the East Bay, and will provide presentations, information, and outreach to local non-profits and local high schools. Currently, over 60 percent of all jobs now require solid, fundamental computer and/or technology skills and yet professional computer training courses can cost between $2,500 and $10,000 and these courses do not provide the support services and job placement assistance that is critical for underserved individuals who are transitioning into the workplace. 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: # Clients Served $ Per Client Served CDBG Funds Recommended $40,000 10 $4,000 Total Program Amount $180,000 10 $18,000 CDBG % of Total Budget 22% Required Match – 50% $20,000 Amount Secured $41,720 Leverage* $3.5 *Does not include other CDBG funds from other jurisdictions. The proposed operating budget anticipates grants from a number of foundations and corporations. The County’s CDBG funds will partially pay for the program’s staff costs. At this time, Stride Center has secured $41,720 for the upcoming program year. During the last seven years, Stride Center has raised over $300,000 from various corporations and foundations and fully expects to be successful in securing the funds needed to operate the program for the upcoming year. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: Stride Center has been operating their technical training and job placement program for the last 11 years. It has established various internship agreements and hiring partners with various local agencies and companies in the information technology industry. Stride Center has its own social venture programs, Relia Tech and ReUse Tech, which have offered jobs and/or job experience opportunities to students and graduates of their program. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: This is an ongoing program that is fully staffed. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: During FY 2013/14 Stride Center trained and placed 10 Urban County residents in information technology jobs, meeting their contractual 124 obligation. As of the 2nd quarter of the current fiscal year, Stride Center has placed 4 Urban County residents in jobs, 40 percent of their goal for the year. Stride Center expects to meet or exceed its goal given the number of clients currently in their training pipeline. As with all ED projects, staff is recommending a “pay per accomplishment” contract with Stride Center for FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17, in which most of the CDBG funds will be contingent with Stride Center’s performance for meeting its contractual goal. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: None. 125 FY 2015/16 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (ED) CATEGORY APPLICANT: West Contra Costa County Business Development Center PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Strengthening Neighborhood Economies 15-06-ED PROJECT SERVICE AREA: West County (with emphasis in North Richmond, San Pablo, Rodeo and Crockett) PROJECT OUTCOME: To provide technical assistance and support to 60 existing businesses or persons wishing to open a business as a way to create/retain jobs. TOTAL PROJECT COST: $254,000 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $96,500 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: FY 2015/16: $65,000 FY 2016/17: $65,000 RECEIVED IN FY 2014/15: $90,000 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The BDC’s CDBG contract will be a “pay per accomplishment” contract, in which most of the CDBG funds will be co ntingent with the BDC’s performance for meeting their contractual goal. Of the $65,000 recommended, $15,000 is exclusively for the marketing of loan programs that may be available to clients. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ANALYSIS: The West Contra Costa Business Development Center (BDC) is a nonprofit corporation with a proven track record of successfully fostering entrepreneurship, particularly within communities striving for economic revitalization. The BDC’s goal is to help businesses grow, create job opportun ities, and generate a renewed sense of economic activity in the communities of West Contra County. The BDC, through its “Strengthening Neighborhood Economies” project, proposes to provide comprehensive business assistance to 60 existing and prospective small businesses/micro-enterprises located in West County with emphasis in the North Richmond, San Pablo, Rodeo and Crockett communities. BDC’s Strengthening Neighborhood Economies project strives to create vibrant commercial corridors in the targeted neighborhoods that maximize the community’s distinctive assets and draws in nearby residents. Specific objectives of the project include: 126  Community Commitment and Participation – engage residents, merchants, community leaders and other stakeholders in the commercial neighborhood revitalization process.  Strengthen Existing Businesses – develop relationships and deliver business assistance services to help merchants achieve key targets, including increased sales and profitability, expanded customer base and product offering, and/or improved storefronts.  Business Recruitment – work with various stakeholders to expand a neighborhood’s business mix, filling vacant storefronts, and creating new job and business opportunities for area residents.  Create a new destination – define the neighborhood’s distinctive appeal and, develop and implement a promotional campaign aimed at drawing customers to the area. Promotional strategies could include regular sales events and larger special events that draw potential customers from a wider area. In FY 2012/13, the BDC implemented a new component to their program, the Contra Costa Capital Access Network (Contra Costa CAN), which connects business owners of microenterprises/businesses to capital via a low-interest business loan program. The actual lenders of these loans are other private organizations that provide capital in the form of low-interest loans to small businesses and microenterprises in the Bay Area. The BDC provides the necessary marketing and outreach of the loan program on a County-wide basis to improve awareness of the various loan programs available to small businesses and microenterprises within Contra Costa County. In order to increase awareness on a County-wide basis, the BDC has a memorandum of understanding with the County’s Small Business Development Center (SBDC) to fully reach central and east County businesses/microenterprises. Marketing and outreach strategies include but are not limited to: direct mailers to various business entities and economic development agencies within the County, outreach to the various Chambers of Commerce in the County, and outreach to the various banks and traditional lending institutions within the County to develop a referral system. In FY 2013/14, 11 businesses received loans totaling $365,000. For the current year, six businesses have received loans totaling $66,000, and there are two addition clients in process of obtaining a loan. The overall program is eligible, feasible, and timely. The BDC has received CDBG funds for many years. Of the $65,000 recommended by staff, $15,000 is to be exclusively for the marketing and outreach of Contra Costa CAN. The amount of CDBG funds available for ED activities is lower for FY 2015/16 than the current fiscal year; therefore, all currently funded ED programs are having funding reduced for the next fiscal year. 127 EVALUATION CRITERIA: 1. CONSOLIDATED PLAN PRIORITY: Economic Development: Reduce the number of persons below the poverty level, expand economic opportunities for very low-and low-income residents and increase the viability of neighborhood commercial areas [CD-5]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBLE ACTIVITY: Micro-enterprise and small business assistance [24 CFR 570.201(o)] 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Benefiting very low- and low-income persons/micro- enterprise activity [24 CFR 570.208(a)(2)(iii)] 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: The program will help expand economic opportunities for 60 low-income persons who have started or are planning to start a business located in West County. In West County, it is estimated that one out of five people lack a high school degree. More alarming is that the unemployment rate in some West County neighborhoods is at or above 20 percent. The BDC will work to facilitate new economic opportunities for low-income persons through successful small business/microenterprise development and operation. The need for small business/microenterprise assistance has been well documented. Studies have shown that a large percentage of small businesses and microenterprises fail within the first five years of start-up due to a lack of supportive services. Recent research identified over 3,000 micro-enterprises in West County. These businesses play a significant role in the economy and create a significant number of jobs. Business development is a critical ingredient in attaining financial security and small business creation is a mechanism for economic mobility, particularly for minorities, immigrants, and the economically disadvantaged. The project, except for the loan program component, will primarily target existing businesses and persons wanting to open a business in West County with particular emphasis on North Richmond, San Pablo, Rodeo, Pinole, Hercules, and Crockett. The BDC will reach merchants, potential new merchants, residents, and community leaders through disseminating materials in the community (libraries, community organizations, schools, and business associations); sending out mailers to target neighborhoods, press releases to local media, including West County Times, Contra Costa Marketplace, Chamber of Commerce newsletters, and Spanish Language media. The loan program component will be provided on a County-wide basis. 128 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: # Clients Served $ Per Client Served CDBG Funds Recommended $65,000 60 $1,083 Total Program Amount $254,000 150 $1,693 CDBG % of Total Budget 25% Required Match – 50% $32,500 Amount Secured $0 Leverage* $3.23 *Does not include other CDBG funds from other jurisdictions. The County’s CDBG funds will be used for staff costs (including benefits), consultants, and rent. They currently are working to secure other funding commitments for FY 2015/16. The BDC has, in the past, been very successful in securing the funds needed to operate the program and they typically do not request funding from their corporate and foundation sponsors until the end of May or early June. Staff expects the BDC to raise the necessary funds for the program. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: The BDC has been in operation since 1995. The current Executive Director has managed the BDC for over ten years and has significant experience working with small businesses as well as a background in non-profit administration. The BDC has qualified staff and uses specialized consultants to assist in delivering services. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: The BDC has been funded with CDBG funds for over ten years and has the experience and required staff to operate this program. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: In FY 2013/14 the BDC provided technical assistance and support to 60 existing business or persons wishing to open a business, meeting their contractual goal. As of the 2nd quarter of the current fiscal year, the BDC is slightly behind pace to meet their contractual goal. However, the BDC fully expects to meet their goal given the number of businesses in the pipeline who are receiving assistance. Staff’s recommendation is for $65,000; however, $15,000 is exclusively for the loan program marketing component. The remaining $50,000 is for the services that are primarily to provide technical assistance services to existing West County microenterprises or prospective microenterprises, which is a reduction of $25,000 from the funded amount of this current fiscal year. The amount of CDBG funds available for economic development activities is less this fiscal year compared to last 129 fiscal year. Therefore, economic development activities are receiving reduced amounts of funding compared to previous years. CDBG staff is recommending a “pay per accomplishment” contract with the BDC for FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17, in which most of the CDBG funds will be contingent with the BDC’s performance for meeting their contractual goal. The BDC has been timely in submitting quarterly reports and quarterly demands/invoices. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORICAL PERSERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: None 130 FY 2015/16 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (ED) CATEGORY APPLICANT: Workforce Development Board PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Small Business Development Center 15-07-ED PROJECT SERVICE AREA: Urban County PROJECT OUTCOME: Group training and individualized advising to 50 new or existing businesses run by low- to moderate- income clients. TOTAL PROJECT COST: $400,000 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $80,000 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: FY 2015/16: $50,000 FY 2016/17: $50,000 RECEIVED IN FY 2014/15: $61,571 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The CDBG contract will be a “pay per accomplishment” contract for FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17 , in which most of the CDBG funds will be contingent with the SBDC’s performance in meeting their contractual goal. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ANALYSIS: The Workforce Development Board (WDB) of Contra Costa County is a 41-member business-led public body responsible for coordinating workforce development policy in the County. The WDB’s mission is to promote a workforce development system responding to the needs of the business community, job seekers, workers, and youth. The Small Business Development Center (SBDC) facilitates economic development by assisting business owners to start and expand businesses, create and retain jobs, increase sales and make other economic impacts. The SBDC will provide in-depth technical assistance to 50 Urban County new or existing microenterprises by providing assistance through business management training and consulting. The SBDC is part of a national network of organizations dedicated to help people start a business and assist existing businesses. According to SBDC, many persons wanting to start a business lack basic business knowledge and business skills that can make the difference between success and failure. SBDC’s training covers topics including executive skill enhancement (goal setting and time management), strategic planning (including business concept development or refinement, planning for financing), market research (industry, target market, trade area, and competition) mission statement development, sales forecast, marketing plan and strategies, general management, pricing, and financial 131 management. This training will result in the development of a sound business plan, which is the finished product expected from participants. One-on-one consulting is also a key service provided to participants. To help participants not feel isolated from the rest of the business community, SBDC provides the structure for networking, support and on-going contract with other small business owners. As a business develops and grows, SBDC provides additional types of information and assistance including providing access to a team of consultants who provide assistance on a variety of business topics. The program is provided at no or low cost to the participant. Ongoing networking and support is also available during business startup and long-term business operations. The program is eligible, feasible and timely and consistent with Consolidated Plan goals to foster micro-enterprise development and small business development. The WDB provides a valuable service to small businesses in the Urban County. The program has been successful in reaching quantitative goals for assisting microenterprises and small businesses. The amount of CDBG funds available for ED activities is lower for FY 2015/16 than the current fiscal year; therefore, all currently funded ED programs are having funding reduced for the next fiscal year. EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATED PLAN PRIORITY: Economic Development: Reduce the number of persons below the poverty level, expand economic opportunities for very low- and low-income residents and increase the viability of neighborhood commercial areas [CD-5]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBLE ACTIVITY: Micro-enterprise and small business assistance [24 CFR 570.201(o)]. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Benefiting very low- and low-income persons/micro- enterprise assistance [24 CFR 570.208(a)(2)(iii)] and job creation [24 CFR 570.208(a)(4)(i)]. 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: It is the intent of the SBDC program to expand economic opportunities for low-income persons by providing training and technical assistance to persons actively working toward starting a microenterprise or expanding an existing business. The need for small business/microenterprise assistance has been well documented as studies show that a large percentage of small businesses fail within the first 3-5 years of startup due to a lack of supportive services. Recent data from the U.S. Small Business Administration reports that small businesses have created 60 to 80 percent of the new jobs annually over the last decade. The Kauffman Foundation’s analysis of this data indicates that companies less than five years old created nearly two-thirds of net new jobs and new and young businesses drive economic growth and job 132 creation. According to the a report prepared by the Contra Costa Council and Contra Costa Economic Partnership, Contra Costa County’s economy is dominated by small businesses and microenterprises. Smaller firms account for 98.2% of all businesses and 57.5% of the total jobs. Additionally, the report indicates that self- employment is the fastest growing segment of the County's economy. Self- employment grew at an average rate of 3.2% over the past nine years and makes up about 15% of the county's workforce. The target population will be reached by advertising, cable TV announcements and flyers to Chambers of Commerce, One Stop Centers, libraries, schools, and City/County offices. Providing an opportunity to low-income persons to receive assistance in the development of a small business as a way to employment is a viable option to attaining economic self-sufficiency. 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: # Clients Served $ Per Client Served CDBG Funds Recommended $50,000 50 $1,000 Total Program Amount $400,000 135 $2,962 CDBG % of Total Budget 12.5% Required Match – 50% $25,000 Amount Secured $120,000 Leverage* $5.66 *Does not include other CDBG funds from other jurisdictions. The cities of Antioch, Concord, and Walnut Creek have provided CDBG funds to this project previously as well. The County’s CDBG funds will be used primarily for staff costs. Besides other jurisdictions’ CDBG funds, the rest of the program budget will be funded by other federal funds (non-CDBG) and Workforce Development Board funds. At this time, WDB has secured approximately $120,000 in program funds for the upcoming year. Based on this program’s past performance to secure funding, staff fully expects the program to raise the necessary funding for the upcoming year. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: This is a continuing program. This program has received CDBG funding since FY 1992/93. The project manager has extensive experience in programs assisting small businesses. The SBDC has qualified staff and uses specialized consultants to assist in the delivery of services. The SBDC is part of a network of organizations dedicated to assist people in starting a business and assist existing businesses. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: This is an ongoing program that is fully staffed. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: SBDC has demonstrated the ability to complete programmatic objectives and meet their contractual goal within the program year. As of the 2nd quarter of the current fiscal year the SBDC has assisted 26 new or 133 existing businesses, which is above pace to meet their contractual goal of 38. The SBDC has been timely in submitting quarterly reports. CDBG staff is recommending a “pay per accomplishment” contract with the SBDC for FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17, in which most of the CDBG funds will be contingent with the SBDC’s performance in meeting their contractual goal. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: None. 134 Community Development Block Grant Infrastructure/Public Facilities Category FY 2015/16 and 2016/17 ATTACHMENT A Project Name Amount Requested County Staff Recommendation for FY 2015/16 County Staff Recommendation for FY 2016/17 Antioch Concord Pittsburg Richmond WC 15-01-IPF Ambrose Recreation & Park District Renovate Ambrose Community Center public restrooms Renovate the public restrooms that serve the auditorium and multipurpose room. $50,000 $50,000 n/a $50,000 $73,985 68% 15-02-IPF Anka Behavioral Health, Inc. Homeless Multi Service Centers & Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) Homes Install wheelchair lift at the Homeless Multi- Service Center in Concord. $9,000 $9,000 n/a $35,400 $7,000 $14,700 $100,000 $4,000 $170,100 $320,500 53% 15-03-IPF Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District (BIMID) Emergency Response Trailer Purchase emergency response trailer for levee and other emergencies on the Island. $13,600 $0 $13,600 $13,600 $17,000 80% 15-04-IPF Martinez Early Childhood Center, Inc. Air Conditioning Installation Install more efficient air conditioning system in the main building of the Martinez Early Childhood Center. $38,878 $38,878 n/a $38,878 $43,198 90% 15-05-IPF Martinez Early Childhood Center, Inc. Roof Replacement/Main building Replace the roof of the main building of the Martinez Early Childhood Center $28,350 $0 $28,350 $28,350 $31,500 90% 15-06-IPF Martinez Early Childhood Center, Inc.Main Kitchen Renovation Replace kitchen floor, cabinets, counters, and install industrial dishwasher of the Martinez Early Childhood Center $30,825 $30,000 n/a $30,000 $34,250 88% CCC Project No.OutcomeApplicant Contra Costa County Infrastructure/Public Facilities Projects % Budget (CDBG) Total Budget Total CDBG Amount Requested (Other CDBG Jurisdictions) 135 Community Development Block Grant Infrastructure/Public Facilities Category FY 2015/16 and 2016/17 ATTACHMENT A Project Name Amount Requested County Staff Recommendation for FY 2015/16 County Staff Recommendation for FY 2016/17 Antioch Concord Pittsburg Richmond WC CCC Project No.OutcomeApplicant Contra Costa County Infrastructure/Public Facilities Projects % Budget (CDBG) Total Budget Total CDBG Amount Requested (Other CDBG Jurisdictions) 15-07-IPF Trinity Center Walnut Creek Trinity Center Bathroom Renovation Rehabilitate two bathrooms, including making them ADA compliant, of Trinity's Homeless Day Center that serves 50-60 homeless clients daily. $60,000 $40,000 n/a $80,000 $120,000 $150,000 80% 15-08-IPF Ujima Family Recovery Services Ujima West Infrastructure/Public Facilities Acquisition Acquisition of site that houses its West Outpatient Treatment Services. $52,000 $0 $21,875 $131,250 $183,250 $700,000 26% 15-09-IPF West Contra Costa Family Justice Center/Tides Center Facilities Improvement at Family Justice Center Renovate outdoor space (Peace Plaza), and replace roof. $50,000 $50,000 n/a $100,000 $150,000 $168,000 89% $332,653 $217,878 $63,825 $35,400 $7,000 $14,700 $331,250 $84,000 $805,003 $1,538,433 52%TOTALS 136 FY 2015/16 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM INFRASTRUCTURE/PUBLIC FACILITIES (IPF) CATEGORY APPLICANT: Ambrose Recreation and Park District PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Renovate Restrooms / 15-01-IPF PROJECT LOCATION: 3105 Willow Pass Road, Bay Point PROJECT OUTCOME: Renovate the public restrooms primarily used by people using the Community Center’s auditorium and multipurpose room including ensuring the restrooms comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). TOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 73,985 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $ 50,000 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: $ 50,000 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. NEPA clearance 2. Project completion by December, 2015 3. CDBG funds are only for hard/construction costs PROJECT ANALYSIS: Ambrose Recreation and Park District (Ambrose) was formed in 1946 and now provides a variety of recreation, parks, youth and adult programs, senior nutrition, holiday activities, classes and special events for the Bay Point community. The Ambrose Community Center (Center), located at 3105 Willow Pass Road, has been in operation since 1979. As well as serving as Ambrose’s district offices, the Center currently provides a senior citizen nutrition program; indoor recreational facilities such as a computer lab, weight room, class rooms, and auditorium with stage; conference rooms; kitchen and dining room; and is the site for the County’s Service Integration Team offices including Spark Point. The auditorium and multipurpose room is used for a wide variety of the recreational, cultural and social activities and is the most utilized space in the Center. The existing restroom adjacent to the auditorium and multipurpose room is in need of renovation including installing new flooring, walls, exhaust fans, lights, vanity panels and fixtures (sinks, toilets, and urinals). In addition, all renovation work will be completed in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The project budget is based on an estimate provided by a qualified contractor familiar with federal prevailing wage rates. The project timeline estimates that the once the project is approved and a contractor selected, construction will take approximately three weeks to complete. This project is eligible, feasible, and timely. 137 EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATION PLAN PRIORITY: The proposed project is consistent with the County’s Consolidated Plan to maintain quality public facilities and adequate infrastructure, and ensure access for the mobility-impaired by addressing physical access to public facilities. [CD-7]. . 2. CDBG ELIGIBILE ACTIVITY: Acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or installation of public facilities and improvements [24 CFR 570.201(c)]. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Area Benefit [24 CFR 570.208(a)(1)(i)]. – 66% Low/Moderate Income 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: The target population benefiting from this project are families living in Bay Point. The Center is located in unincorporated Contra Costa County and meets the criteria for “Area Benefit”. 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: Ambrose has requested CDBG funds to cover 68 percent of the total project budget. The remaining funds required to complete the project will be provided by Ambrose and meets the minimum 25 percent match requirement. The project budget is based on an estimate provided by a flooring contractor familiar with prevailing wages. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: Ambrose staff will have the day to day responsibility and oversight for this project. Ambrose staff has experience in receiving County CDBG funds and is familiar with the County’s requirements to comply with federal procurement and labor standards. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: This project has the remaining funding in place and a feasible timeline for completion. The County must meet federal requirements for the timely expenditure of funds. Therefore the allocation will be rescinded and reprogrammed for other timely CDBG eligible projects if Ambrose cannot meet the conditions of approval listed above. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: Ambrose has received County CDBG funds in the Infrastructure/Public Facilities and Public Service categories in the past and has been timely in the submission of required reports and have met stated goals. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: All projects are subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). No environmental issues are anticipated. The project will require compliance with federal procurement and labor standards. 138 FY 2015/16 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM INFRASTRUCTURE/PUBLIC FACILITY (IPF) CATEGORY APPLICANT: Anka Behavioral Health, Inc. PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Central County Homeless Multi-Service Center Wheelchair Lift 15-02-IPF PROJECT LOCATION: 2047 Arnold Industrial Way - Suite A, Concord PROJECT OUTCOME: Install a wheelchair lift to Anka’s Homeless Multi- Service Center in Concord to improve accessibility and allow more space for client services TOTAL PROJECT COST: $11,000 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $9,000 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: $9,000 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. NEPA Clearance 2. Construction completion by December, 2015 3. CDBG funds are only for hard/construction costs PROJECT ANALYSIS: Anka Behavioral Health, Inc. (Anka) operates a number of one- stop centers, known as Homeless Multi-Service Centers, throughout the County to assist homeless person with a variety of needs. The Homeless Multi-Service Centers provide various drop-in services to chronically homeless adults experiencing mental health and substance abuse disorders. Services include on-site access to basic services such as showers and personal hygiene items, phones and voice mail, mail services, clothing and laundry, and transportation. Case management, mental health and/or substance abuse screening and assessments, group counseling, and referrals to treatment programs are also provided by Anka staff. Anka’s Central County Homeless Multi-Service Center (Center) is located on 2047 Arnold Industrial Way – Suite A in Concord. It is open Monday through Friday from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM to provide drop-in services to individuals and families experiencing homelessness, which may also be experiencing mental health and substance abuse disorders. Over 7,000 clients are currently served annually at the Homeless Multi- Service Center. The Center currently has a wheelchair ramp to provide accessibility to the restrooms within the facility per the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); however, the wheelchair ramp takes up space within the facility that would otherwise be used to provide client services. The project includes installation of a wheelchair lift that would provide ADA accessibility to the restrooms and free up space currently occupied by the wheelchair ramp that would then be used to provide client services. 139 Anka has experience with CDBG funds and has completed similar projects with County CDBG funds in previous years. The current timeline has the project beginning in October, 2015 with project completion in December, 2015. The project is eligible, feasible, and timely. EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATED PLAN PRIORITY: The proposed project is consistent with the County’s Consolidated Plan to maintain quality public facilities and adequate infrastructure, and ensure access for the mobility-impaired by addressing physical access to public facilities. [CD-6]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBILE ACTIVITY: Acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or installation of public facilities and improvements [24 CFR 570.201 (c)]. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Presumed beneficiaries/homeless persons [24 CFR 570.208 (a)(2)(i)(A)]. 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: The wheelchair lift improvements will enhance ADA accessibility within the Center and free up space to provide more services to individuals and families who are experiencing homelessness, and mental health and substance abuse disorders. 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: As proposed, CDBG funding represents 81 percent of the $11,000 project budget. The remaining $2,000 in funds meets the 10 percent match requirement and will be provided by Anka. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: Anka has completed similar projects with CDBG funds and has demonstrated the ability to comply with federal requirements. The construction work will be planned and supervised by Anka staff. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: The application includes a timeline with the project beginning in October, 2015 and project completion in December, 2015. The County must meet federal requirements for the timely expenditure of funds. Therefore, the allocation will be rescinded and reprogrammed for other timely CDBG eligible projects if Anka cannot meet the condition of approval listed above. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: Anka has received CDBG funds to complete similar projects in the past. Those projects were completed in compliance with federal requirements. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: All projects are subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act and California Environmental Quality Act. No environmental issues are anticipated on this project. The project will require compliance with federal procurement and labor standards. 140 FY 2015/16 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM INFRASTRUCTURE/PUBLIC FACILITIES (IPF) CATEGORY APPLICANT: Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District (BIMID) PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Purchase of Emergency Response Trailer / 15-03-IPF PROJECT LOCATION: 1200 Taylor Road, Bethel Island PROJECT OUTCOME: Purchase an emergency response trailer /mini command center to be used in the case of an emergency to ensure BIMID staff respond in a timely and effective manner. TOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 17,000 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $ 13,600 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: $ 13,600 (FY 2016/17 Funding) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. NEPA clearance 2. Project completion by December, 2016 3. CDBG funds to be used to purchase trailer – no materials or equipment PROJECT ANALYSIS: The Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District (BIMID) was created by the State Legislature in 1960. BIMID’s powers include not only maintaining the levee that surrounds and protects Bethel Island, but also allows for many other activities including the “distribution of water for public and private purposes; parks and playgrounds; airports and works to provide for drainage.” Because Bethel Island is below sea level, rain water run-off and levee seepage needs to be consistently pumped over the levees to drain the island. To accomplish this, BIMID operates and maintains four pumps. The emergency response trailer would be available to BIMID staff to respond in an efficient and effective manner to emergencies primarily related to leaks in the levee and other potential flooding situations. Currently, BIMID stores all of its response equipment materials in a storage unit that is stationary and is not able to be moved from location to location on the island. The trailer will also act as a semi-command center in cases of emergencies. If funded, this will be the second CDBG funded project that BIMID has undertaken. BIMID was awarded CDBG funds this year to purchase and install a new pump to help ensure there is sufficient capacity to pump water out of its canal system to prevent the island from flooding. The pump purchase and installation project is expected to be completed by June 30, 2015. 141 The project budget is based on estimates provided by a supplier of mobile trailers. Matching funds in the amount of $3,400 or 20 percent of the total cost of the project will be provided by BIMID. This project is eligible and timely. Because of the limited amount of funding available, staff recommends that this project be funded in FY 2016/17. BIMID has stated that receiving the funding in FY 2016/17 is fine. EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATION PLAN PRIORITY: The proposed project is consistent with the County’s Consolidated Plan to maintain quality public facilities and adequate infrastructure, and ensure access for the mobility-impaired by addressing physical access to public facilities. [CD-7]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBILE ACTIVITY: Acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or installation of public facilities and improvements [24 CFR 570.201(c)]. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Area Benefit [24 CFR 570.208 (a)(1)(i)(B)] – 52.9% Low/Moderate Income (which is above the 41.6% requirement for Contra Costa County). 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: The target population benefiting from this project are the residents of Bethel Island by ensuring that BIMID staff respond in an effective and efficient manner to emergencies. 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: BIMID has requested CDBG funds to cover 80 percent of the total project budget. The remaining $3,400 required to complete the project will be provided by BIMID and meets the 20 percent match requirement for the project. The project budget is based on an estimate provided by a supplier of mobile trailers. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: Although this will be BIMID’s second CDBG funded project, CDBG staff is confident that they will ensure the CDBG program requirements are met including compliance with federal procurement and labor standards . 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: Because insufficient funds are available to finance this project in FY 2015/16, staff is recommending funding in FY 2016/17. BIMID will be required to complete the project by December 2016. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: See # 6 above. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: All projects are subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This project is located in a flood zone area but because the pump is not considered a “structure” flood insurance will not be required to be attained and maintained over the life of the project. No other environmental issues are anticipated. The project will require compliance with federal procurement and labor standards. 142 FY 2014/15 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM INFRASTRUCTURE/PUBLIC FACILITIES (IPF) CATEGORY APPLICANT: Martinez Early Childhood Center (MECC) PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Install Air Conditioning Unit / 15-04-IPF PROJECT LOCATION: 615 Arch Street, Martinez PROJECT OUTCOME: Replace the existing “swamp cooler” used to cool the main building with a new energy efficient air conditioning unit to ensure a safe and comfortable environment is provided for the children and staff. TOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 43,198 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $ 38,878 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: $ 38,878 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. NEPA clearance. 2. Project completion by December, 2015 3. CDBG funds are only for hard/construction costs PROJECT ANALYSIS: Martinez Early Childhood Center (MECC) is a private, non-profit agency dedicated to offering subsidized high quality toddler and preschool education and full time care for children 1 to 5 years old from low income families. In doing so, the children’s parents can work, look for work, or receive vocational training that will lead to employment. MECC has been providing services since 1974. Currently, a total of 150 children are provided services; 65 or 76 percent of these children reside in the Urban County with a majority of the children living in Martinez. The swamp cooler used to cool the main building in the summer months is old, ineffective and energy inefficient. Replacing the swamp cooler with a new energy efficient air conditioning unit will ensure the building is comfortable for the children and staff during hot days and eliminate the need to spend money to repair the unit on a regular basis. Staff requested that MECC prioritize the five applications submitted for FY 2015/16 funding. This project was listed #1 in priority. The project budget is based on an estimate provided by a qualified contractor familiar with federal prevailing wage rates. The project timeline estimates that the entire project will be completed by December, 2015 if not sooner. This project is eligible, feasible, and timely. EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATION PLAN PRIORITY: The proposed project is consistent with the County’s Consolidated Plan to maintain quality public facilities and adequate infrastructure, and ensure access for the mobility-impaired by addressing physical 143 access to public facilities. [CD-7]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBILE ACTIVITY: Acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or installation of public facilities and improvements [24 CFR 570.201(c)]. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Low and Moderate Income Benefit [24 CFR 570.208(a)(2)(i)(B)]. 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: The population benefiting from this project are children and their lower income families being provided subsidized child care and preschool education at MECC. The project will ensure that t he main building is energy efficient and provides a safe and comfortable environment for the children and staff. 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: MECC has requested CDBG funds to cover 90 percent of the total project budget. The remaining $4,320 required to complete the project will be provided by MECC and meets the 10 percent match requirement. The project budget is based on an estimate provided by a contractor familiar with prevailing wages. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: MECC staff will have the day to day responsibility and oversight for this project. MECC staff has received County CDBG IPF funds in the past and is very familiar with the County’s requirements to comply with federal procurement and labor standards. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: MECC has the remaining funding needed to complete the project and proposes a feasible timeline for completion. The County must meet federal requirements for the timely expenditure of funds. Therefore the allocation will be rescinded and reprogrammed for other timely CDBG eligible projects if MECC cannot meet the conditions of approval listed above. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: MECC has received County CDBG funds in the IPF category in previous years, has been timely in the submission of required reports, and has met stated goals. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: All projects are subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). No environmental issues are anticipated. The project requires compliance with federal procurement and labor standards. 144 FY 2015/16 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM INFRASTRUCTURE/PUBLIC FACILITIES (IPF) CATEGORY APPLICANT: Martinez Early Childhood Center (MECC) PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Install New Roof / 15-05-IPF PROJECT LOCATION: 615 Arch Street, Martinez PROJECT OUTCOME: Replace the roof of the main building. TOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 31,500 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $ 28,350 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: $ 28,350 (FY 2016/17 Funding) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. NEPA clearance. 2. Project completion by June, 2016 3. CDBG funds are only for hard/construction costs PROJECT ANALYSIS: Martinez Early Childhood Center (MECC) is a private, non-profit agency dedicated to offering subsidized high quality toddler and preschool education and full time care for children 1 to 5 years old from low income families. In doing so, the children’s parents can work, look for work, or receive vocational training that will lead to employment. MECC has been providing services since 1974. Currently, a total of 150 children are provided services; 65 or 76 percent of these children reside in the Urban County with a majority of the children living in Martinez. The roof of the main building is over 20 years old and needs to be replaced. By replacing the old roof, it is expected that MECC will save on energy costs and ensure a safe and comfortable environment for the children and staff. Staff requested that MECC prioritize the five applications submitted for FY 2015/16 funding. This project was listed #3 in priority. The project budget is based on an estimate provided by a qualified roofing contractor familiar with federal prevailing wage rates. T he project timeline estimates that the entire project will be completed by December, 2015 if not sooner. This project is eligible, feasible, and timely. EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATION PLAN PRIORITY: The proposed project is consistent with the County’s Consolidated Plan to maintain quality public facilities and adequate infrastructure, and ensure access for the mobility-impaired by addressing physical access to public facilities. [CD-7]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBILE ACTIVITY: Acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, 145 or installation of public facilities and improvements [24 CFR 570.201(c)]. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Low and Moderate Income Benefit [24 CFR 570.208(a)(2)(i)(B)]. 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: The population benefiting from this project are children and their lower income families being provided subsidized child care and preschool education at MECC. The project will ensure that the main building is energy efficient and provides a safe and comfortable environment for the children and staff. 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: MECC has requested CDBG funds to cover 90 percent of the total project budget. The remaining $3,150 required to complete the project will be provided by MECC and meets the 10 percent match requirement. The project budget is based on an estimate provided by a contractor familiar with prevailing wages. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: MECC staff will have the day to day responsibility and oversight for this project. MECC staff has received County CDBG IPF funds in the past and is very familiar with the County’s requirements to comply with federal procurement and labor standards. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: MECC has the remaining funding needed to complete the project and proposes a feasible timeline for completion. The County must meet federal requirements for the timely expenditure of funds. Therefore the allocation will be rescinded and reprogrammed for other timely CDBG eligible projects if MECC cannot meet the conditions of approval listed above. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: MECC has received County CDBG funds in the IPF category in previous years, has been timely in the submission of required reports, and has met stated goals. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: All projects are subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). No environmental issues are anticipated. The project requires compliance with federal procurement and labor standards. 146 FY 2014/15 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM INFRASTRUCTURE/PUBLIC FACILITIES (IPF) CATEGORY APPLICANT: Martinez Early Childhood Center (MECC) PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Renovate Kitchen / 15-06-IPF PROJECT LOCATION: 615 Arch Street, Martinez PROJECT OUTCOME: Renovate the Kitchen in the Main Building TOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 34,250 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $ 30,825 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: $ 30,000 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. NEPA clearance. 2. Project completion by June, 2016 3. CDBG funds are only for hard/construction costs PROJECT ANALYSIS: Martinez Early Childhood Center (MECC) is a private, non-profit agency dedicated to offering subsidized high quality toddler and preschool education and full time care for children 1 to 5 years old from low income families. In doing so, the children’s parents can work, look for work, or receive vocational training that will lead to employment. MECC has been providing services since 1974. Currently, a total of 150 children are provided services; 65 or 76 percent of these children reside in the Urban County with a majority of the children living in Martinez. MECC wishes to renovate the existing kitchen located in the main building. The kitchen is used by MECC to prepare snacks, breakfast and lunch for the 75-90 children enrolled in its child care program. The kitchen cabinets, flooring, and counters are old, chipped and damaged. The proposed project includes replacing the cabinets, counter tops and flooring; replacing three windows over the sink area with two new windows; painting the kitchen, and installing a new industrial dishwasher. Staff requested that MECC prioritize the five applications submitted for FY 2015/16 funding. This project was listed #2 in priority. The project budget is based on an estimate provided by a qualified contractor familiar with federal prevailing wage rates. The project timeline estimates that the entire project will be completed by December, 2015 if not sooner. This project is eligible, feasible, and timely. EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATION PLAN PRIORITY: The proposed project is consistent with the County’s Consolidated Plan to maintain quality public facilities and adequate infrastructure, and ensure access for the mobility-impaired by addressing physical 147 access to public facilities. [CD-7]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBILE ACTIVITY: Acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or installation of public facilities and improvements [24 CFR 570.201(c)]. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Low and Moderate Income Benefit [24 CFR 570.208(a)(2)(i)(B)]. 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: The population benefiting from this project are children and their lower income families being provided subsidized child care and preschool education at MECC. The project will ensure that the kitchen can be used in a safe and efficient manner, and that all of the children are provided healthy and nutritious meals and snacks. 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: MECC has requested CDBG funds to cover 90 percent of the total project budget. The remaining $4,250 required to complete the project will be provided by MECC and exceeds the 10 percent match requirement. The project budget is based on an estimate provided by a contractor familiar with prevailing wages. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: MECC staff will have the day to day responsibility and oversight for this project. MECC staff has received County CDBG IPF funds in the past and is very familiar with the County’s requirements to comply with federal procurement and labor standards. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: MECC has the remaining funding needed to complete the project and proposes a feasible timeline for completion. The County must meet federal requirements for the timely expenditure of funds. Therefore the allocation will be rescinded and reprogrammed for other timely CDBG eligible projects if MECC cannot meet the conditions of approval listed above. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: MECC has received County CDBG funds in the IPF category in previous years, has been timely in the submission of required reports, and has met stated goals. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: All projects are subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). No environmental issues are anticipated. The project requires compliance with federal procurement and labor standards. 148 FY 2015/16 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM INFRASTRUCTURE/PUBLIC FACILITIES (IPF) CATEGORY APPLICANT: Trinity Center Walnut Creek PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Rehabilitate two bathrooms at the Homeless Day Center / 15-07-IPF PROJECT LOCATION: 1924 Trinity Avenue, Walnut Creek 94596 PROJECT OUTCOME: Rehabilitate two bathrooms, including making them compliant with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) at the Homeless Day serving 50-60 homeless persons daily. TOTAL PROJECT COST: $150,000 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $60,000 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: $40,000 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. NEPA clearance. 2. Bid process completed by August, 2015. 3. Construction completed by October, 2015. PROJECT ANALYSIS: The Trinity Center Walnut Creek (Center) provides congregate meal service, laundry facilities, bathrooms/showers, clothing donations, telephone/mail access and a safe place for homeless adults to spend the day. They also focus on referrals to agencies that foster rehousing and supportive housing. The Center served over 500 people in FY 2013/14. The Center operates out of a long and narrow one-story building next to St. Paul’s Episcopal Church. There are two bathrooms, each located within separate rooms along a long hallway. Neither bathroom is accessible for people with disabilities. The bathrooms also show significant signs of use and dilapidation. Although both bathrooms have showers, only one is currently usable; this creates congestion on the bathroom with a working shower. Both bathrooms need to be refurbished to relieve pressure and congestion for showering and to become accessible. The project budget is based on an estimate provided by a qualified contractor and matching funds ($30,000) will be provided by the Center. Although the Center building is owned by St. Paul’s Episcopal Church next door, they have given permission for this work to be undertaken. The project timeline has the proposed project commencing shortly after the start of the new fiscal year and will take around three months to complete. This project is eligible and timely. 149 EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATED PLAN PRIORITY: Infrastructure and Accessibility: Maintain quality public facilities and adequate infrastructure, and ensure access for the mobility- impaired by addressing physical access barriers to public facilities [CD-6]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBLE ACTIVITY: Acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or installation of public facilities and improvements [24 CFR 570.201(c)]. The project is located in Walnut Creek - approximately 50 percent of the individuals served are Urban County residents. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Presumed Beneficiary/Homeless Persons [24 CFR 570.208(a)(2)(i)(A)] 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: The target population benefiting from this project are homeless individuals served by the Center. These individuals have a need for daily access to facilities that promote good hygiene. 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: The Center has requested County CDBG funds along with Walnut Creek CDBG funds to cover 80 percent of the total project budget – the Center will provide a 20 percent match. Walnut Creek has committed $80,000 to the project. The project budget is based on an estimate provided by a local contractor familiar with prevailing wages. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: The Center’s Executive Director will have day-to-day responsibility for this project. There are several staff and multiple volunteers who are able to continue to provide services during construction. This is the Director’s first time overseeing this type of project, but it is not overly complex and CDBG staff will provide ongoing assistance to fulfill CDBG requirements. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: The Center is ready to go to bid for this project and has indicated they believe it could be completed by October 2015. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: The Center’s activities have been funded with CDBG from Walnut Creek and ESG from the County for the last two years. This is the first time that the Center has applied for CDBG funds in the IPF category. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: All projects are subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). No environmental issues are anticipated. The project will require compliance with federal procurement and labor standards. 150 FY 2015/16 & FY 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM INFRASTRUCTURE/PUBLIC FACILITIES (IPF) CATEGORY APPLICANT: Ujima Family Recovery Services (Ujima) PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Acquisition of Ujima’s West Outpatient Treatment Services Building/15-08-IPF PROJECT LOCATION: 12960 San Pablo Avenue, Richmond PROJECT OUTCOME: To acquire the building in which Ujima’s West Outpatient Treatment Services Program is housed in order to reduce operating costs and provide higher level of services to more women and their families. TOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 350,000 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $ 21,875 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: $21,875 (FY 2016/17 Funding) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. NEPA Clearance 2. Most current client demographic information must be submitted to CDBG staff prior to CDBG contract execution. 3. Must provide CDBG staff with title report and estimated mortgage closing statement. 4. All other funding for the down payment and financing for the purchase must be secured prior to CDBG contract execution. PROJECT ANALYSIS: Ujima Family Recovery Services is a non-profit organization dedicated to helping families recover from alcoholism, drug addiction and behavioral health problems. Since 1986, Ujima has provided services towards stopping substance abuse, and empowering mothers and their families to develop life skills to lead healthy productive lives. Ujima primarily serves low-income women and their families. As part of its recovery services, Ujima operates its West Outpatient Treatment Services Program, a 180-day outpatient treatment services program for low-income mothers and pregnant women recovering from alcohol and substance abuse . Ujima’s West Outpatient Treatment Services Program includes an array of treatment and educational services including: drug/alcohol treatment; weekly women’s health education workshops; prenatal care/perinatal support; child care and child development services; and case coordination with other community-based resources and services to support their long term health and recovery. The West Outpatient Treatment Services Program serves approximately 70 women and 50 children within a year, of which 75 percent are from the City of Richmond and 25 percent are from the Urban County. At any one time, 15 women are enrolled at the West Outpatient Treatment Services Program. 151 Ujima is requesting CDBG funds to acquire the building located at 12960 San Pablo Avenue, Richmond, in which it operates its West Outpatient Treatment Services Program. According to Ujma, acquisition of the site would reduce operating costs by approximately 50 percent and would allow Ujima to upgrade to intensive day treatment that provides a higher level of services to their clients and their families. . The County’s CDBG funds would assist in providing a portion of the down payment to acquire the site. The total down payment amount is $105,000, or approximately one third of the total purchase price. Ujima is also requesting $65,625 in CDBG funds from the City of Richmond for the down payment. The total requested amount of CDBG funds from both the County and the City of Richmond is $87,500, which makes up 83 percent of the down payment amount and 25 percent of the total purchase price of $350,000. Ujima is also requesting the remaining balance of funds for the down payment from The Lesher Foundation, one of their current funders which has expressed interest in assisting Ujima in acquiring the site. Ujima will finance the remaining balance of the purchase cost. At this time, the City of Richmond has not determined their CDBG funding recommendations and it is uncertain if they will recommend CDBG funds towards this project for FY 2015/16. Given that the City of Richmond’s CDBG funds are the major funding source for the down payment (62.5 percent of the total down payment) and the uncertainty of the CDBG funds from the City of Richmond towards this project, County CDBG staff is recommending CDBG funds for this project in FY 2016/17. This will allow Ujima time to secure funding from the City of Richmond or, in the case that the City of Richmond does not recommend CDBG funds for this project, allows Ujima time to obtain funds from other sources. It would also provide Ujima the time to provide County staff a title report for the site and the final estimated mortgage closing statement to purchase the site. The County’s CDBG funds would be available for this project on July 1, 2016 if all conditions of approval are met. EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATION PLAN PRIORITY: Infrastructure and Accessibility: Maintain quality public facilities and adequate infrastructure, and ensure access for the mobility- impaired by addressing physical access barriers to public facilities [CD-6]. 2. CDBG ELIGIBILE ACTIVITY: Acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or installation of public facilities and improvements [24 CFR 570.201(c)]. The project is located in the City of Richmond, but the facility does serve Urban County residents. The facility’s roster of clients is approximately 25 percent Urban County residents and approximately 75 percent City of Richmond residents. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: At least 51% verified low/mod [24 CFR 570.208 (a)(2)(i)(B)] 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: The target population benefiting from this project is low-income individuals and their families. Ujima primarily serves families who meet the federal definition of poverty. 152 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: Ujima has requested County CDBG funds to cover 21 percent of the total down payment amount. The remaining 79 percent for the down payment is being proposed to be provided by City of Richmond CDBG funds and The Lesher Foundation. The project budget is $350,000, which is the total purchase price, with $105,000 being the down payment amount. Ujima will finance the remaining balance of the purchase cost; however, the financing has not been secured as of yet. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: Ujima’s Administrator will have primary responsibility for the oversight of this project. She has overseen other CDBG funded renovation projects at this facility. She is familiar with the County’s requirements to comply with federal requirements, including procurement and labor standards. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: The timeline for this project indicates that Ujima wants to acquire or start the acquisition process on July 1, 2015; however the majority of funds for the down payment amount have not been secured and it is uncertain at this time that they will be secured by July 1, 2015. Therefore, County CDBG staff is recommending CDBG funds for FY 2016/17 to allow Ujima to secure the necessary funding for the balance of the down payment amount. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: Ujima received CDBG funds to complete an HVAC installation project in FY 2013/14 and to complete an ADA restroom renovation and exterior painting/siding project in FY 2010/11. Ujima’s staff was responsive and diligent to ensure that these projects met federal requirements and submitted all necessary reports in a timely manner. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORICPRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: All projects are subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). No environmental issues are anticipated with this project. Given that the project is solely for acquisition, compliance with federal procurement and labor standards is not necessary. 153 FY 2015/16 & 2016/17 CDBG PROGRAM INFRASTRUCTURE/PUBLIC FACILITIES (IPF) CATEGORY APPLICANT: West County Family Justice Center FISCAL SPONSOR: Tides Center PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Facility Improvement / 15-09-IPF PROJECT LOCATION: 246 24th Street, Richmond PROJECT OUTCOME: Renovate the West County Family Justice Center building by improving an outdoor open space into a plaza for clients and staff (Peace Plaza), installing a new roof, and installing a fence and other security improvements adjacent to the parking lot. TOTAL PROJECT COST: $168,000 AMOUNT REQUESTED: $ 50,000 AMOUNT RECOMMENDED: $ 50,000 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. NEPA clearance 2. CDBG funds provided by City of Richmond 2. Project completion by December, 2015 3. CDBG funds are only for hard/construction costs PROJECT ANALYSIS: The West Contra Costa Family Justice Center (FJC) started operating in 2011 at a temporary location in Richmond’s Hilltop Mall serving victims and survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, child abuse, elder abuse and human trafficking. According to the FJC, in Contra Costa County, nearly 10,000 child abuse cases and 2,000 elder abuse cases are reported annually. In addition, there are over 3,000 domestic violence related arrests per year. Medical studies link long term effects of family violence and abuse to a number of serious health problems, from diabetes to obesity, to substance abuse and eating disorders. Abused women experience physical and emotional problems for many years after abuse ends. Children exposed to family violence often suffer from a variety of health and mental health conditions including post-traumatic stress and other psychological issues which can go on untreated for years. Exposure to violence reshapes the human brain and increases antisocial behavior, substance abuse, mental illness, and adverse health outcomes in adulthood. When survivors of interpersonal violence seek help, they are often frustrated by a fractured social services system. They may have to travel to multiple locations and tell their stories repeatedly. According to the FJC, national statistics show that victims may have to access as many as 32 different agencies for assistance. These hurdles can discourage their 154 efforts and cause many people to simply stop seeking help. The FJC brings public and private partners together under one roof to provide comprehensive wrap-around services. Between August 2013 and July 2014, the FJC coordinated services and referrals for 247 families. The FJC is a unique and effective public-private partnership with integrated services and extensive community connections. FJC’s fiscal sponsor (The Tides Center) has entered into a long-term lease with the City of Richmond to occupy the building on 24th Street in Richmond, and use it as a family justice center to “provide coordinated services to victims of domestic violence.” The City of Richmond provided a $2 million bridge loan to finance the majority of the renovation work to the building but sufficient funding was not available to complete the building/site improvements proposed in the application for CDBG funds. The primary renovation project will be completed in April 2015 and the FJC plans to move into is permanent location shortly thereafter. The proposed “Peace Plaza” will provide clients and staff with a quiet outdoor space where they can relax and reflect. In addition, the building’s roof needs to be replaced. Lastly, FJC wishes to install a new fence and other security improvements in the parking lot serving the facility. The project budget is based on an estimate provided by a qualified contractor familiar with federal prevailing wage rates. The project timeline estimates that the once the project is approved and a contractor selected, the work will take approximately two months to complete. This project is eligible, feasible, and timely. EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. CONSOLIDATION PLAN PRIORITY: The proposed project is consistent with the County’s Consolidated Plan to maintain quality public facilities and adequate infrastructure, and ensure access for the mobility-impaired by addressing physical access to public facilities. [CD-7]. . 2. CDBG ELIGIBILE ACTIVITY: Acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or installation of public facilities and improvements [24 CFR 570.201(c)]. 3. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Low and Moderate Income Benefit [24 CFR 570.208(a)(2)(i)(A)]. 4. TARGET POPULATION AND DEMONSTRATED NEED: The target population benefiting from this project are victims and survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, child abuse, elder abuse and human trafficking. 5. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: FJC has requested CDBG funds from the County ($50,000) and the City of Richmond ($100,000) to cover 90 percent of the total project budget. The remaining funds required to complete the project will be provided by FJC and meets the minimum 10 percent match requirement. At this time, it is unclear how much, if any, Richmond will provide towards this project. If Richmond CDBG funds are 155 not provided, the County’s funds could help finance the Peace Plaza improvements. The project budget is based on an estimate provided by a flooring contractor familiar with prevailing wages. 6. EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY: FJC staff will have the day to day responsibility and oversight for this project. FJC staff has experience in receiving County CDBG funds and is familiar with the County’s requirements to comply with federal procurement and labor standards. 7. PROJECT READINESS AND TIMELINESS: This project has the remaining funding in place and a feasible timeline for completion. The County must meet federal requirements for the timely expenditure of funds. Therefore the allocation will be rescinded and reprogrammed for other timely CDBG eligible projects if FJC cannot meet the conditions of approval listed above. 8. PAST PERFORMANCE: While the FJC and Tides have not received County CDBG funds in the Infrastructure/Public Facilities and Public Service categories in the past, staff at both agencies have worked with CDBG funded projects in other capacities and are very familiar with the CDBG program requirements and regulations. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION/RELOCATION/PREVAILING WAGE ISSUES: All projects are subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). No environmental issues are anticipated. The project will require compliance with federal procurement and labor standards. 156 INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE 9. Meeting Date:04/13/2015   Subject:WASTE HAULER ORDINANCE Submitted For: William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director  Department:Health Services Referral No.: IOC 15/8   Referral Name: Waste Hauler Ordinance  Presenter: Marilyn Underwood Contact: Marilyn Underwood (925) 692-2521 Referral History: On May 8, 2012, the Board of Supervisors referred to the Internal Operations Committee a review of the Waster Hauler Ordinance in order to address a number of problems with illegal haulers including: complaints that illegal haulers have been hired by private parties to remove refuse, and some of these companies have subsequently dumped the collected material along roadways and on vacant lots. incidents in which the Sheriff's Department found refuse haulers with improperly secured loads, which pose a hazard to motorists if items fall onto roadways. haulers that have been found transporting the collected materials to illegal transfer stations that have not undergone the required zoning, environmental, and permitting review, and pose significant threats to public health and the environment. haulers that have been found collecting residential or commercial garbage in violation of local franchise agreements. haulers that are not posting the bond required by Contra Costa County Ordinance Section 418-2.006. This bond is intended to ensure compliance with applicable laws. It is questionable if illegal haulers carry liability insurance, and they may not be in compliance with tax or labor laws. The Internal Operations Committee held several discussions on this matter over the last two years, during which substantial work and progress were noted. The IOC requested Environmental Health staff to work with the County Counsel to develop a final draft ordinance for circulation to stakeholders for comment, and then for consideration by the IOC. In September 2015, Environmental Health asked to suspend work on the waste hauler ordinance so that priority could be given to the updating of Environmental Health fees. Ordinance No. 2014-12, which authorizes the collection of a plan review fee for plan review and inspection of food facilities and swimming pools, was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on December 2, 2015, allowing work to resume on the waste hauler ordinance.  In a December 2014 status report to the IOC, Environmental Health staff reported that they had met with County Counsel and DCD Solid Waste/Recycling staff to discuss issues raised by the proposed waste hauler ordinance, including the interplay between the proposal and existing 157 agreements with franchise waste haulers. Each franchise agreement is unique and must be examined to determine the extent to which it might conflict with the County's proposal. This examination, which may necessitate meetings with the franchisees and the waste authorities to clarify and resolve any such conflicts, must be completed before staff can recommend a draft ordinance for Committee consideration. Referral Update: Attached is an update from Environmental Health on the status of the examination of the County's franchise agreements for conflicts with the proposal to further regulate waste hauling with a new ordinance. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): ACCEPT report on the status of the development of a waste hauler ordinance. Fiscal Impact (if any): None. Attachments Status Update from Environmental Health Div on Development of a Waste Hauler Ordinance 158 159 INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE 10. Meeting Date:04/13/2015   Subject:TRIENNIAL REVIEW OF BOARD ADVISORY BODIES - PHASE I Submitted For: David Twa, County Administrator  Department:County Administrator Referral No.: IOC 15/13   Referral Name: Triennial Review Report  Presenter: Terry Speiker, Chief Assistant CAO Contact: Vicky Mead 925-335-1907 Referral History: The Board of Supervisors has asked a number of county residents, members of businesses located in the county and/or county staff to serve on appointed bodies that provide advice to the Board on matters of county or other governmental business. Members provide a resident’s, business or county staff perspective on a wide variety of policy issues or programs that the BOS oversees. Their efforts can directly affect the quality of life in Contra Costa County and they provide countless hours in this public service.  Appointees begin their official advisory body involvement through BOS action and serve for a specified term. Each body has an enabling charge and bylaws, which spell out structure, work processes and the expectations of members. Although bodies do not have the authority to hire employees, most bodies have been assigned county or contracted staff to assist the Chair, Vice Chair and the members with conducting the business of each body and providing regular reports, recommendations and advice to the BOS or other units of government. The business of each body is public and governed by all the applicable state and local laws about transparency and availability of the body’s records to the members of the public. Some bodies are required to adopt a conflict of interest code, although the Fair Political Practices Commission asked us in 2014 that we review all bodies with these code requirements to see if they are legally necessary, according to State Law. Bodies are expected to file an annual work plan with the BOS and a list of goals and priorities that will guide their work for that year. They also are asked to submit an annual report that summarizes their accomplishments and activities.  Periodically the BOS evaluates and examines the advisory bodies to determine if any changes are needed in the structure, composition, Board charge, enabling mandate, assignments or the inner workings of the bodies. Some of these reviews have led to changes in bylaws, membership requirements, structure, enabling charges, assignments/duties or sun-setting of the body.  160 Beginning in 2010 and concluding in 2011/2012, the BOS conducted an extensive review of advisory body policies, makeup and structures and passed Resolution Nos. 2011/497 and 2011/498, which revised and restated the Board’s governing principles for the bodies. The Resolutions dealt with all bodies, whether created by the BOS as discretionary or those that the BOS is mandated to create by state or federal rules, laws or regulations. The Resolutions directed the CAO/COB’s Office to institute a method to conduct a rotating triennial review of each body and to report on the results of that review and any resulting staff recommendations to the BOS, through the IOC, on a regular basis.  The Resolutions laid out the questions and issues on which the Supervisors wanted the report to be based and directed that the information be requested from and submitted by each advisory body once every three years. Board members were particularly interested information concerning whether or not advisory bodies should continue in their existing forms or structures or if their duties, or membership should be changed. They also asked for staff comments on the possibility to sunset committees or to merge bodies together for more efficiencies, greater productivity or better service to the public.  This memo and the attached reporting documents is the first of these triennial reviews. In addition to self-reported information submitted by the bodies that were reviewed, it also contains staff comments or recommendations that came about as a result of the materials that were submitted. The mandatory or discretionary nature of each body is also indicated.  Referral Update: Staff recommendations or summary comments about individual bodies are presented for BOS consideration in the remainder of this memo. Additional Triennial Review information and specifics about individual bodies can be found in the complete report, which is attached. Bay Area Library Information System Advisory Council (BALIS): notification has been received from the County Librarian that this Advisory Body has been sun-set by its enabling body (the State of CA). Because of this change, it can be deleted from the BOS list of Advisory Bodies to whom the BOS makes an appointment. (Was a mandatory body) Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Aging: Based on the Triennial Review materials submitted, there might be “mission creep” in the work activities described, into both program and policy areas, rather than the body remaining in strictly an advisory role to the BOS and the Area Agency on Aging, for plan development (see the Advisory Council on Aging section of attached report for specific examples). This body's requirement of filing a Form 700 should be reviewed by County Counsel. (Mandatory body) Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee of Contra Costa Transportation (Joint Powers) Authority (CCTA)and Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee of Contra Costa County: these two bodies are presented together because there can be confusion about their differing obligations. The first committee, which is a mandatory body, is a component of the regional CCTA transportation planning efforts; there is no need for change in their work or structure. The second body, which is a BOS discretionary body, meets informally, usually once per year, according to information received from the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) staff. It does not have written policies; it also has several members whose terms have expired. Its primary purpose appears to be the review of revenue allocations and comment on whether or not bicycle and pedestrian projects are included in projects funded by the CA Department of Mass Transportation. Supervisors might want to ask DCD to review all aspects of the body’s work and bring 161 might want to ask DCD to review all aspects of the body’s work and bring recommendations to the BOS for restructuring the membership, charge and structure or recommend incorporating the work of this body into other duties of the department or other advisory bodies.  Economic Opportunity Council: The only change that staff recommends the BOS consider is to ask County Counsel to review the necessity for the members to continue to file the Statement of Economic Interest. (Mandatory body) Hazardous Materials Commission: No changes appear to be necessary at this time. (Mandatory body) Agricultural Task Force Commission: In the 12 months in 2012/13, immediately prior to this Triennial Review survey, materials that were submitted indicate that the body did not convene and that it did not have current bylaws. The BOS may want to ask the newly appointed department head to review the charge, work and structure of this body and bring recommendations for any changes, including sunset or merger with other advisory bodies, back to the IOC for Supervisorial consideration and direction. (BOS discretionary body) Contra Costa County Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board: When originally created, this body was mandated by State law; that mandate was repealed in 1993. The only issue that has arisen from review of the body’s submitted materials is the extensive amount of county staff time that appears to be necessary to support the subcommittee work undertaken by this body. (Was originally a mandatory body; now is a BOS discretionary body) Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County: This BOS advisory body is the only entity allocated funds ($15,000) within the county’s budget to help carry out its activities. The body has developed a regional and State-wide reputation and focus to promote the arts; advisory work with the BOS was less well documented in the materials submitted by the body. The BOS may wish to ask the Senior CAO Deputy assigned to work with this body explore with the group’s members whether or not the entity should reconsider/redefine its focus as an advisory body to the Board or explore spinning off as a non-profit organization. (BOS discretionary body) Aviation Advisory Committee: Staff recommends that the functions of this body in relation to the County’s policy-making Airport Land Use Committee and the BOS Airports Committee be considered for further review by all the appropriate BOS policy-making bodies to determine if advisory functions continue to be necessary at this time. If a determination is made to continue the body, the necessity of filing the Form 700 should be reviewed by County Counsel. (BOS discretionary body) Contra Costa County Commission for Women : This body’s major activities, as described in the Triennial Review materials, are to regularly host and participate in local, regional and national seminars and outreach activities on women’s issues. The advisory role to the BOS was less clearly outlined or articulated in the materials submitted. The body reports having difficulty meeting quorum requirements for meetings; this situation might be occurring because the membership of appointees is quite large. CAO staff suggests the BOS consider asking the body to work with the CAO Senior Deputy assigned to the body to review and update both their current work plan to provide advice to Board on the issues of women and girls in Contra Costa County, and the body’s structure, bylaws and membership requirements so an advisory body meeting quorum can more easily be met. (BOS discretionary body) Emergency Medical Care Committee: This body is under the purview of the Health Services Department. Although the current activities and scope of the committee appear to exceed the original purposes for which the body was developed, no recommendations are made for a change in structure at this time. However, the Supervisors may wish to incorporate some of 162 this entity’s work activities into an appropriate BOS Committee or expand the advisory body’s official charge. (BOS discretionary body) Historical Landmarks Advisory Committee: Based on the report materials submitted, the functions of this advisory committee have primarily been to assist the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) to identify historical sites within the County and affect registration as landmarks. The body’s report indicates that it met 6 times over the 36 months prior to when the triennial review was submitted. It is possible that a local non-profit Historical Society would be willing to continue to provide advice to both DCD and the Board without continuation of this BOS advisory body. (BOS discretionary body) Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee: Based on the materials submitted by the body, their activities appear to have focused a significant amount of effort on evaluating internal operations of the County departments with whom it interacts. There are no specific changes suggested by staff at this time unless the BOS would ask them to undertake any changes/modifications to their annual work plan and activities. (BOS discretionary body) Library Commission: This body has enabling legislation, passed in collaboration with the Mayors’ Conference, which continues in effect until the end of 2016. Staff recommends that the triennial review of this body be postponed until the 2015-2016 review cycle to coincide with this 2016 date and to enable the current County Librarian (who was not yet on board when this review process was conducted) to participate in the review of the body. This delay would also give the Librarian an opportunity to work with the body to submit a current annual report and work plan to the BOS. (BOS discretionary body) Public and Environmental Health Advisory Board: This body is another entity under the purview of the Health Department, with staff duties also assigned to this department. The body did not submit Triennial Review materials. However, the department did report that the body has stopped meeting for an indefinite period. There is also is no staff support available at this time. The IOC/BOS should consider requesting that the Health Department submit a status update on the body, including any necessity to maintain the body for funding purposes. (BOS discretionary body) Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): The IOC is asked to provide direction regarding any of the findings and recommendations to the staff report. Staff to return to the Committee with answers to any questions or issues that were raised in this first Triennial Review. Staff to complete the next set of advisory body reviews for IOC/BOS, based on Supervisorial input and direction from the first set of reviews. Staff to continue to work with and train the advisory body members, as well as the County or contract staff assigned to the bodies, in the Triennial Review process and the other materials (annual reports and annual work plan) that bodies should be regularly filing with the BOS. Fiscal Impact (if any): There is no immediate fiscal impact of the review. However, the advisory body members, who volunteer many hours of their time to assist the Board of Supervisors in considering issues of county government that affect the residents and businesses of Contra Costa, provide a valuable service that has not been quantified or calculated in financial terms.  Attachments 163 Attachments CAO TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW - PHASE I REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 164 County of Contra Costa OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR MEMORANDUM DATE: APRIL 8, 2015 TO: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE KAREN MITCHOFF, District IV Supervisor, Chair JOHN GIOIA, District I Supervisor, Vice Chair FROM: THERESA SPEIKER, Chief Assistant County Administrator SUBJECT: TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III ______________________________________________________________________________ I. Referral History of the Triennial Review of County Advisory Bodies Reviews of the County's citizen's advisory bodies, also called committees, commissions or boards, were conducted beginning in 2005 and continuing through 2011/12. The purpose of these periodic reviews was to provide the Board of Supervisors (BOS) with the opportunity and structure to comprehensively examine and evaluate the work of the County's advisory bodies/committees, commissions or boards on a regular basis.i Outcomes from the reviews guided the BOS to make various policy changes, procedural, structural or program recommendations for some bodies, and sun-setting or consolidation of others. The Board of Supervisors formally approved a review process for advisory bodies in Board Order OA.6 adopted March 6, 2007. The BOS Order of March 6, 2007 cited Resolution No. 2002/377, as the Board's enabling legislation for its advisory bodies. The prior enabling legislation in Res. 2002/377 was superseded in its entirety in 2011, when the BOS conducted an extensive review of its advisory body policies, and thereupon adopted Resolution 2011/497 which revised and restated the Board's governing principles for citizens' advisory bodies. Resolution 2011/497 (and its companion legislation Res. 2011/498 -- which addressed and similarly affected independent and special districts rather than the BOS discretionary committees) contained specific language directing the formalization of a Triennial sunset review process for committees, boards, and commissions. The 2011 resolutions are available electronically, through a link from the "front page" of the County’s web site in the advisory body database. (This database is also referred to as the Maddy Book".) 165 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 2 The recently amended and re-enacted Resolutions governing these bodies now provide: "IV. FORMATION AND DISSOLUTION OF ADVISORY BODIES A. The Board of Supervisors may form an advisory body for the purpose of rendering advice or recommendations to the Board on issues of importance. The Board of Supervisors may dissolve an advisory body at the Board’s discretion, consistent with conditions imposed by law. Commencing [after] July 1, 2012, each advisory body shall be reviewed at least once every three years pursuant to a procedure established by the Board. B. When the Board creates an advisory body, the Board may determine whether or not the body should adopt a conflict of interest code. V. RESPONSIBILITIES OF ADVISORY BODIES. A. Each advisory body: 1. Shall operate within its mandate as defined in the Board Order, Resolution, or Ordinance creating the body and any applicable law, and may establish specifically defined objectives consistent with its mandate. 2. Shall elect a chairperson and notify the Clerk of the Board of said selection; 3. Shall establish regularly scheduled meeting times and inform the Clerk of the Board of such schedule; 4. Subject to limitations resulting from statutory requirements, may adopt a set of operating rules (bylaws) addressing attendance requirements for continuing membership, the election of officers, and the establishment of subcommittees composed solely of current members of the advisory body. Should the advisory body adopt operating rules (bylaws) that address other topics, these rules shall not be operative until they have been approved by the Board of Supervisors. 5. Shall keep necessary records including agendas and records of action. 6. Shall comply with by the Ralph M. Brown Act (Gov. Code, §§ 54950, et. Seq.) and County’s Better Government Ordinance (County Ordinance Code Division 25.) 7. Shall comply with the Board’s policy against conflict of interest. 8. Shall submit an Annual Report to the Board on its activities, accomplishments, membership attendance, required training/certification (if any), and proposed work plan or objectives for the following year, in December. (The form for the Annual Report is found in the Advisory Body Handbook.) VI. This Resolution and Resolution 2011/498 supersede Resolution 2002/377 in its entirety." *** As quoted above, the new Resolutions included a provision to establish a process and procedures to review each advisory body every three years, and all advisory bodies over a three year period. This statement of intent in Resolutions 2011/497 and 2011/498 was enacted through Resolution 2012/261 (C.138, 6/26/2012) entitled, “Establishing a Triennial Review Process for the Evaluation of Certain County Boards, Committees, and Commissions." 166 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 3 II. Referral Update This report contains the results of the first cycle of advisory body Triennial Reviews under the formal process contained in Resolution 2012/261. Recent Criteria for evaluation of Advisory Committees, Boards, and Commissions Criteria for the last comprehensive BOS advisory body review, conducted in 2009, were: Purpose: "Whether the advisory body's focus and membership is consistent with its purpose." Workload: "Whether the meeting frequency is appropriate for the advisory body's workload." Support: "An evaluation of the amount and type of support provided by the County for its appropriateness, consistency and cost." Policies and Procedures: "Whether there is a need to clarify the policies and procedures under which the advisory body operates." CAO staff continued to factor in the BOS criteria from 2009 when reviewing the selected advisory bodies that have been included in this first Triennial Review. The Triennial Review Resolution itself (Resolution 2012/261) provides the following specific guidance about the content of the review: Paragraph 4 (c) This report shall include: i. An evaluation of the body’s level of involvement in County programs relative to the duties and responsibilities defined in their establishing authority; ii. Actions accomplished or completed on issues assigned to the body by the Board of Supervisors, and/or status of goals set by the body; iii. The justification for continuance (if recommended), with appropriate goals and timetables for the term of continuance; iv. Citation of the appropriate government codes mandating the body and its activities (where applicable). v. A recommendation from the staff of the body (where applicable) regarding revisions and statement of body’s effectiveness. vi. A recommendation from the Department Head regarding continuance or deletion of body. 167 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 4 III. Discussion of Mandatory and Discretionary Committees and Evaluation of Selected Committees Distinction between Mandatory and Discretionary Committees The Triennial Sunset Review Resolution (No. 2012/261) provides that [it] shall apply "to all bodies which are formed by the Board of Supervisors by federal or state mandate, County Ordinance, Joint Powers Agreement, Regulatory Code, Board Order, or Board Resolution." These distinctions refer to the legal basis on which the committees are established and therefore affect the source and scope of authority of each committee.1 Accordingly, some bodies which have been reviewed are "discretionary" bodies, defined as those which are established pursuant only to the Board of Supervisors' discretion and authority as the local government governing board. Other bodies are in contrast mandated for creation pursuant to State or Federal law; therefore these committees are not "discretionary" by the Board of Supervisors because they are created to comply with State or Federal mandates. The mandatory and discretionary advisory bodies included in this review are discussed in separate sections which follow.2 TABLE 1: ADVISORY COMMITTEES INCLUDED IN TRIENNIAL REVIEW A. Mandated Boards, Commission, or Committees 1. Bay Area Library Information System Advisory Council (BALIS) 2. Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Aging 3. Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (also included in this Triennial Review is a review of the 1 The Board of Supervisors has authority to govern its "discretionary" advisory bodies autonomously, but does not have the same level of authority over boards or commissions that are established by State or Federal law, or "mandate." The Board of Supervisors also does not govern Joint Powers Authorities, most Special Districts, and other independent jurisdictions. 2 The County's current Administrative Bulletin (AB No. 124) provides for a review every three years of the advisory bodies that are established based on the authority and solely at the discretion of the Board of Supervisors ("discretionary" advisory committees) -- but not of mandatory or independent boards commissions or committees. 168 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 5 discretionary advisory body, the Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee of Contra Costa County) 4. Economic Opportunity Council 5. Hazardous Materials Commission B. Discretionary Advisory Committees 1. Agricultural Task Force Committee 2. Contra Costa County Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board 3. Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County 4. Aviation Advisory Committee 5. Contra Costa Commission for Women 6. Health Services Department sponsored committees: Emergency Medical Care Committee Public and Environmental Health Advisory Board 7. Historical Landmarks Advisory Committee 8. Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee 9. Library Commission 169 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 6 Part A: Triennial Review Materials for Mandated Committees A. Mandated Boards, Commission, or Committees 1. Bay Area Library Information System Advisory Council (BALIS) 2. Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Aging 3. Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (also included in this review category, with the commentary section on the mandated body, is a review of the Countywide Advisory Committee of Contra Costa County, a discretionary advisory body) 4. Economic Opportunity Council 5. Hazardous Materials Commission A1. Bay Area Library Information System Advisory Council (BALIS) (a) The target population specified by the Committee is (was) the Administrative Council of Library Directors from Bay Area public libraries. (b) Background: The County's participation in the Bay Area Library Information System Council was approved by Board Order of March 13, 1979, pursuant to the California Library Services Act of 1977. The County Administrator's Office was recently notified by the County Librarian that this Advisory Council has ceased to exist, informing the County that no further appointments would be required by the Board of Supervisors. (c) CAO Staff Comment: See the background information provided by the County Librarian. (d) CAO Staff Recommendation Delete the Advisory Council from the current list of boards, committees and commissions as recommended by the Library Director. 170 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 7 A2. Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Aging (a) The target population specified by the Committee is: Contra Costa residents 60 years of age and older. (b) Background Aging services are funded and provided pursuant to the U.S. Older Americans Act and California Welfare and Institutions Code (WIC). The WIC Section 9400 specifically describes the role of "Area Agencies on Aging and Advisory Councils" in providing an extensive scope of services to the older population. Section 9400(c) provides: “Each area Agency on Aging3 shall maintain a professional staff that is supplemented by volunteers, governed by a board of directors or elected officials, and whose activities are reviewed by an advisory council consisting primarily of older individuals from the community." In the submitted Triennial Review materials, the Committee describes its function as: [to] provide a means for Countywide planning, cooperation and coordination for individuals and groups interested in improving and developing services and opportunities for older residents of this county. The Council provides leadership and advocacy on behalf of older persons and serves as a channel of communication and information on aging issues. (c) CAO Staff Comment The Council on Aging's work includes a wide range of aging related services or programs in addition to reviewing the Area Plan on Aging. These efforts have included outreach activities and presentations directly to the community, such as programs on driver safety, housing resources and transportation services. Over time the role of the Council on Aging appears to have expanded to include an administrative oversight and policy analysis function that could blur the distinction between the Area Agency on Aging (the County departments as governed by the Board of Supervisors/ Area Agency on Aging) and the Advisory Council on Aging. As an example, the Triennial Review materials submitted show that the Advisory Council's President/Chairperson is referred to as the "Chief Executive Officer" whose duties include: "directs and approves Council work done by staff";- "at the request of the Area Agency on 3 The Area Agency on Agency is the local planning agency -- whose Board is comprised of the Board of Supervisors -- for receipt and allocation of Federal and State funds for aging-related services and programs. 171 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 8 Aging staff, provides narrative sections for Area Plans; "presides at Area Agency on Aging annual public hearing;" and, "Along with the Director of Aging and Adult Services, is the liaison for the County Board of Supervisors." These statements may appear to describe the Area Agency and the Advisory Council on Aging as separate policy-making bodies that are operating jointly, when in fact the Council is expected to perform only in an advisory capacity to the Area Agency on Aging. In addition, the mission and activities of the Council have expanded to include a variety of policy and program subcommittees, in addition to its Planning Committee, which are not specifically related to Area Plan review. The work of the Planning Committee is "to work with AAA staff to develop the Area Plan." Separate subcommittees have included "Bylaws", "Publicity", "Housing Work Group", "Health Work Group," "Transportation Work Group" and Legislative Advocacy Work Group. The legislative work group is charged to develop action plans for proposed and potential legislation and submit recommendations to the Advisory Council on Aging "for their approval." One accomplishment cited was the work "to review the County's contract to provide emergency transportation services… [and]efforts to maintain a working relationship with the American Medical Response Regional Manager and the County's own EMS Administrator." Such activities may not be strictly advisory to the Board of Supervisors/Area Agency on Aging. (d) CAO Staff Recommendation It may be appropriate for CAO staff to review the current relationship between the Aging and Adult Services professional managers/staff and the Advisory Council on Aging, and to clarify, if necessary, the respective roles of County staff, the Board of Supervisors, and the Advisory Council on Aging in developing, reviewing, and implementing the Area Plan (for allocating Federal funds) and conducting related programs. This review would ensure that any policy or program recommendations, and related public advocacy activities that are undertaken by the Contra Costa Advisory Council on Aging, would remain consistent with the Council's function as an advisory body, and would emphasize that the role of the Advisory Council is to "review and advise" rather than to "plan and direct." 172 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 9 A3. Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (a Joint Powers Authority) The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) is a separate governmental entity from the County. The CCTA operates as Contra Costa’s principal transportation planning agency and Congestion Management Agency for purposes of receiving and allocating certain planning funds. and Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee of Contra Costa County "To provide input to the County and the cities of the County on bicycle projects for Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds to construct bicycle/pedestrian projects and to provide advice to cities and the County on bicycle planning matters. (b) Background Only the first of these committees, the CCTA Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, was originally selected for inclusion in the current review. However, both bodies have been included for purposes of clarity because the similarity in the names of the distinct committees sometimes leads to confusion about the individual bodies and their work. The CCTA's citizen’s advisory committee is widely acknowledged as a component of the regional transportation planning efforts that are coordinated and managed by the CCTA. It is included in the mandated category of the BOS bodies. The Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee is a BOS discretionary body. It meets annually, according to the Department of Conservation and Development, to recommend whether or not to fund identified bicycle and pedestrian projects with Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds. (The California Department of Mass Transportation oversees the public hearing procedures used to identify unmet transit need in connection with TDA allocations.) The Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee indicates that it does not currently have written polices and meets only informally to review specific revenue allocation issues related to Transportation Development Act funds. The body’s Triennial Review materials also indicated that "there are currently several members whose appointment has expired." (c) CAO Staff Comments and Recommendations 1. Continue to appoint a County representative to the Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority; and, 173 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 10 2. Consider updating the Board's direction and oversight of the Contra Costa County Bicycle Advisory Committee. If seen as desirable by the Supervisors, this recommendation could be accomplished by the BOS deliberating whether or not to expand the role or alter the structure of the Bicycle Advisory Committee. If the charge to the committee were changed or expanded or the structure altered, the Bicycle Advisory Committee could be asked to provide a broader range of advisory input to the Board of Supervisors on such issues as bicycle and pedestrian related accessibility and safety, as well as continuing its current duty of providing resource allocation advice. A4. Economic Opportunity Council (a) The target population specified by the Committee is: "Low income population of Contra Costa County" (b) Background: The Economic Opportunity Council was originally established on January 16, 1965, by Board Resolution 3671, pursuant to the United States Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 (often cited as 'the war on poverty.') The current bylaws of the Economic Opportunity Council (EOC) report the legal authority and scope of responsibilities of this body as follows: "As set forth in the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, as amended, the Community Services Block Grant Act of 1981 and the Coats Human Services Reauthorization Act of 1998, as amended, and by the actions of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, the responsibilities of the EOC are: A. To make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors for EOC membership; B. To hold public hearings as scheduled to make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors for the Community Action Plan of the Community Services Bureau (CSB). [CSB is a division of the Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD).] The EOC sponsors a Community Action public hearing each Spring to receive public input on services that are needed in the community. C. To participate in subcontractor Request for Proposal/Request for Information process as directed by program guidance; D. To conduct at least one site monitoring to the subcontractors; E. To submit an Annual Report to the Board of Supervisors on its accomplishments, membership attendance, required training/certification, proposed work plan or objectives. F. To view fiscal and programmatic reports submitted by staff and the performance of Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) contractors and the Weatherization program services. 174 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 11 G. To receive and review budget, minutes, and other reports or materials prepared by staff." The EOC work plan for 2013 included an explicit goal to "increase community involvemen t and information sharing in the areas of interest identified in the Community Action Plan, which are: violence awareness, unemployment, safety, housing, and access to health care." Staff of the County's Community Services Bureau provides direct "technical and administrative program management support" to the EOC, according to the current bylaws. (c) CAO Staff Comment The EOC appears to be a successful and well-functioning Advisory Council, mandated under Federal law for the administration of Federal economic development programs. The EOC provides important public input during the County's consideration of proposals for Federal funds to assist low income communities. The EOC appears to have a well-established and productive relationship with the Community Services Bureau (CSB) of the Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD). EOC serves as an important intermediary and facilitator for reviewing, implementing, and evaluating community service projects that are funded by Federal block grant funds and administered by EHSD. The EOC current bylaws direct that members of the EOC are required to file Statement of Economic Interest forms (Form 700) under the provisions of California's fair political practices act. According to information received in 2014 from the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC), such financial disclosure is not needed for an advisory body performing non policy-making functions. Therefore this provision could be referred to County Counsel for review and amended, if necessary, based on a determination of whether the EOC members fall within the State’s legal requirements for filing. (d) CAO Staff Recommendation Continue the Economic Opportunity Council with its present form and charge. A5. Hazardous Materials Commission (a) The target population specified by the Committee is: "General public, Elected Officials of the County and Cities" (b) Background The Hazardous Materials Commission was originally created by Board Order in 1986, in response to State legislation (California Health and Safety Code Sec. 25135 et. seq.) which required counties to develop hazardous waste management plans related to the transportation and storage of hazardous materials. Contra Costa County has fully developed 175 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 12 and implemented the Hazardous Waste Management Plan that was mandated under H&S Code 25135 in 1986. California Health & Safety Code 25135.2 provided for an advisory committee to assist in the development and implementation of the State-mandated hazardous materials plan.4 The Board Order which established the Commission on 10/14/1986 included a mandate that was specifically related to the development of a transportation and response plan for hazardous materials as required by Health and Safety Code 25135. In the ensuing years, the Commission has developed a role within County government as a significant forum for ongoing issues related to the administration of the County's hazardous waste management plan, including evaluation of specific incidents. The Commission's bylaws provide that, in addition to the duties imposed by State law, the Commission would, "oversee the management coordination of all aspects of the storage or transportation of hazardous materials and the generation, storage, transportation, treatment, and disposal of hazardous waste;" and, "Report and make recommendations on such further matters concerning hazardous materials and wastes as are referred to the Commission by the Board of Supervisors." (c) CAO Staff Comment The Hazardous Materials Commission has played an active role, since its inception in 1986, in the development and oversight of the County's Hazardous Waste Plan, and currently provides an active forum for public discussion. However, since the plan was initially developed, the Hazardous Materials Commission's official role in the management of hazardous waste programs by the County has become less focused than at inception, when its role was mandated by the State Legislature. 4 H&S Code Sec. 25135.2: (a) Each county shall establish an advisory committee of at least seven members to assist the county in the preparation and administration of the county hazardous waste management plan… (b) The advisory committee shall do all of the following: (1) Advise the county staff, the board of supervisors of the county, and the staff, mayors, and council members of the cities within the county, on issues related to the development, approval, and administration of the county hazardous waste management plan. (2) Hold informal public meetings and workshops to provide the public with information, and to receive comments, during the preparation of the county hazardous waste management plan. 176 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 13 The County will continue to realize maximum benefit from the Hazardous Materials Commission through ongoing and active collaboration between the Commission and the Health Services Department's Hazardous Materials Division. The Commission's dual focus should continue to be to (1) apply its unique perspectives and technical expertise to specific problems or issues identified for resolution by the Hazardous Materials Division, or the Board of Supervisors, and in addition, consistent with its role as an advisory body, (2) provide a regular public forum for discussion of public concerns. The Hazardous Materials Commission's bylaws were last amended and approved by the BOS in June, 2000. The bylaws issued in 2000 include Conflict of Interest provisions that should be reviewed and updated, if necessary, by County Counsel. The Hazardous Materials Commission expressly solicits the perspectives of its business, industrial, and commercial members as representatives of their industries. (d) CAO Staff Recommendations Continue the Hazardous Materials Commission in its present form/structure. Consider reviewing the body’s annual work plan in relation to mandates in the applicable CA Health and Safety Codes. 177 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 14 Part B: Discretionary Committees -- (Created by the Board of Supervisors) B. Discretionary Advisory Committees 1. Agricultural Task Force Committee 2. Contra Costa County Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board 3. Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County 4. Aviation Advisory Committee 5. Contra Costa Commission for Women 6. Health Services Department sponsored committees: Emergency Medical Care Committee Public and Environmental Health Advisory Board 7. Historical Landmarks Advisory Committee 8. Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee B1. Agricultural Task Force Committee (a) The target population specified by the Committee is: "Growers ranchers and other agricultural interested parties." (b) Background The Agricultural Task Force Committee in its current form was established June 20, 2000 by Board Order. In the Triennial Review materials submitted, the Committee describes its function as: “Advisory to the Board of Supervisors on agricultural related issues in regard to zoning, land mitigation and other agricultural related issues… brought forth by the Board of Supervisors or agricultural interests.” (c) CAO Staff Comment In the 12 months immediately preceding this Triennial Review survey, the committee reports that it did not convene to meet and that it does not have current bylaws. (According 178 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 15 to the County's Advisory Body Handbook, all advisory bodies should adopt bylaws and update them as needed). (d) CAO Staff Recommendation In view of the recent department head appointment, this might be the perfect opportunity to refresh and update the BOS charge to and expectations for this committee. Revisiting the Committee’s charge could help focus the annual work plan and activities on those agricultural-related policy issues in Contra Costa County on which the BOS searches for advice. Attention also needs to be given to developing a regular meeting schedule, annual work plan or mission statement, and publically posting committee agendas and meeting notices, unless the BOS wishes to consider sun-setting this committee or merging it with another body. B2. Contra Costa County Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board (a) The target population specified by the Committee is: "Families, individuals, and communities in Contra Costa County affected by alcohol and other drug-related problems." (b) Background The Board of Supervisors established the Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board of Contra Costa County in 1992 in response to State legislation (Health and Safety Code 11809 and 11964 (k)] that mandated the establishment of Drug Abuse Advisory Boards and Alcohol Advisory Boards by counties. State Mandate Repealed This legislative mandate was repealed when the Legislature approved Senate Bill 627 on March 2, 1993, which, as reported in Legislative Counsel's Digest issued by the Legislature, "Permit[s] a county to eliminate or consolidate any health advisory boards that are required by state law or regulation, or in any existing contract with the [State]." Consequently, the State mandate for the County to create health advisory boards was abolished under SB 627 in 1993. The Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board's amended status (to a discretionary rather than State-mandated committee) was formally acknowledged by Board Order approved (Item I.O.-1) June 28, 1993. Since that time, the Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board has operated as a discretionary advisory body of the Board of Supervisors, and has continued to conduct outreach and education on behalf of its constituencies, who are individuals and groups seeking to access, deliver or improve the County's drug and alcohol related services and programs. Current Mission and Focus In its Triennial Review materials, the committee described its current mission as follows and being "approved by the Board of Supervisors on 8/28/2012 To assess family and community needs regarding prevention and treatment for alcohol and other drug related problems. Resultant findings and 179 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 16 recommendations are forwarded to the Health Services Department and the Board of Supervisors. The [Advisory] Board [sic] also serves as an advocate for these findings and recommendations to the communities that we serve.” The Advisory Council's recent programs, services, and activities to achieve its mission have included community awards programs for "People Who Make a Difference," panel and educational presentations on topics such as proposals for marijuana legalization, prescription drug abuse prevention, coping with stigma and recovery, and services for persons 55 and older. The Committee reports a wide variety of services and programs to increase visibility, raise awareness, provide support and education, and generally advocate on behalf of drug and alcohol programs. The Contra Costa Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council indicated that it holds an annual strategic planning session and prepares a related work plan. The body’s 2013 Annual Report listed identified goals and priorities that included: (1) Understand Alcohol and Other Drug Related Services for "55 +"; (2) Reduce Youth Use and Access for Alcohol, Marijuana and Other Drugs; (3) Increase Awareness of Prescription Drug Abuse and (4) Assess AOD Related Reentry Resources and Needs. In addition, it highlighted a number of community programs and events that focused attention on alcohol and other drug issues, prevention strategies, community needs, and treatment services. (c) CAO Staff Comment The Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council produces numerous information pieces on and preforming extensive advocacy activities about alcohol and other drug programs, especially as they relate to individual health, community well-being, and the accessibility and quality of services. (d) CAO Staff Recommendation While the mission of the body is in keeping with the BOS mandate to the group and the review indicates that much good advocacy work is being done, it might be appropriate for the BOS to ask the body to re-evaluate the highly formal structure of the Advisory Council. The Council’s current structure and work load is very labor intensive on the County staff assigned to attend the meetings, prepare and deliver reports, agendas, meeting packages, and detailed minutes. The BOS may want to consider asking the body to devise and implement ways to continue to perform outreach and advocacy activities and its educational missions, as described in the Triennial Review materials submitted, on a less formal and more cost effective basis, perhaps by producing more limited meeting materials and less detailed minutes, and/or by reducing the number of sub-committees. 180 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 17 B3. Arts and Culture Commission (AC5) (a) The target population specified by the Committee is: Residents of Contra Costa County (b) Background The Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County (AC5) was created by the Board of Supervisors on December 13, 1994 with the following purpose: “…to advise the Board of Supervisors in matters and issues relevant to the art and culture of the County, advance the arts in a way that promotes communication, education, appreciation, and collaboration throughout the County.” (c) CAO Staff Comment The Triennial Review materials reflect that AC5 views itself as having a regional and national focus in addition to its specific efforts in Contra Costa County: “AC5 continually works to advocate for the arts by communicating with regional, state and federal arts organizations. The California Arts Council, California Arts Advocates, and Americans for the Arts are just a few of the many groups we are involved with.” In its Review materials, the Commission appears to be describing many of the characteristics of a non-profit organization and in fact, has created a separate non-profit entity. This body’s work is focused on providing self-directed programs and activities, including presentations before the BOS and regularly rotating art displays in the County’s main administration building. The body has participated in soliciting grant funds received from the State, in addition to the receipt of a small $15,000 budgeted item from the County; these funds are used to support the work of the body. However, their Triennial Review materials are less clear in describing how their activities and work efforts relate to an advisory role for the BOS. (d) CAO Staff Recommendation The Senior Deputy who is the primary contact for the Commission in the CAO’s Office was asked to assist in providing a recommendation to the BOS. The Deputy can see two possible paths for the body; either; Refresh/redo their structure, membership, work plan and BOS charge to direct their focus and work efforts on providing arts-related advice to the Board; or Work with the members of the body to consider whether or not the time is appropriate for the body to spin off as a non-profit arts organization, and assist with that process if a decision would be made to sunset the body as advisory to the BOS. 181 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 18 B4. Aviation Advisory Committee (a) The target population specified by the Committee is: "Residents of Contra Costa County, with particular focus on residents in close proximity to airports; businesses of Contra Costa County, with particular focus on those businesses on airport property; and pilots using our airports, with particular emphasis on pilots with aircraft based at our airport." (b) Background In the Triennial Review materials, submitted by the Committee, it describes its functions as: ● Oversight and guidance of Airport financials; ● Noise monitoring and abatement; ● Oversight and guidance of development opportunities. The Aviation Advisory Committee was established by the Board of Supervisors February 15, 1977 by Board Order; language amended by Board Order (Item I.O.-11) on December 15, 1987. Its members include District appointees of the Board of Supervisors, local citizens serving "at large," and members who are nominated by Diablo Valley College, City of Pleasant Hill, and City of Clayton; and a seat for a representative of the Airport Land Use Commission. According to the current bylaws, its mission is, “To provide advice and recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on the aviation issues related to the economic viability and security of airports in Contra Costa County. The Committee may initiate discussions, observations, or investigations, in order to make its recommendations to the Board. The Committee may hear comments on airport and aviation matters from the public or other agencies for consideration and possible recommendations to the Board of Supervisors or their designees. The Aviation Advisory Committee shall cooperate with local, state, and national aviation interests for the safe and orderly operation of airports. The Aviation Advisory Committee shall advance and promote the interests of aviation and protect the general welfare of the people living and working near the airport and the County in general. In conjunction with all of the above, the Aviation Advisory Committee shall provide a forum for the Director of Airports regarding policy matters at and around the airports.” The Committee describes its impact as, "creating a process" for each of these areas, and in particular ensuring appropriate land use around the airport and working to reduce noise. (c) CAO Staff Comment The Triennial Review materials that were submitted reflect an active committee that is engaged in a wide range of administrative, managerial and procedural issues associated 182 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 19 with Airport day-to-day operations and business, and also reflect the Airport's multi-faceted relationships with its various constituencies. The managerial and administrative focus that was described may be somewhat reflective of the body’s staff person, listed as Keith Freitas, Director of Airports. Given its self-assessment, it may be more appropriate to consider defining this committee as a body that works with/at the direction of and in support of the Airports Committee of the Board of Supervisor, rather than as a BOS advisory body. The most recent bylaws were approved by Board Order C.30 on September 14, 2010, in which changes were made to membership, attendance requirements, officers, and scheduled meetings. The bylaws amendments "strengthened the conflict of interest language" according to the 9/14/2010 Board Order. However, in light of direction the CAO’s Office received in 2014 from the California's Fair Political Practices Commission about the application of conflict of interest requirements (including financial disclosure forms) to County advisory bodies, asking County Counsel to review whether the Aviation Advisory Committee is required to have conflict of interest provisions in its bylaws and whether its members are required to file Form 700. In view of the time that has passed since the Aviation Advisory Committee was originally created, in might be appropriate based on the Triennial Review materials submitted, to ask the Director of Airports or the Aviation Advisory Committee itself to review the specific advisory role and work plan for the Board of Supervisors. (d) CAO Staff Recommendations 1. Formally review the Aviation Advisory Committee's functions in relationship to the County's airport policy making committees and re-evaluate the role of the Advisory Committee in relation the policy setting bodies. 2. County Counsel should be asked to review whether the Aviation Advisory Committee, as an advisory committee, is required to have conflict of interest provisions in its bylaws and whether its members are required to file Form 700. 183 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 20 B5. Contra Costa County Commission for Women (a) The target population specified by the Committee is: "women and girls." (b) Background Established as a discretionary advisory body in 1984 by the Board of Supervisors, the Women's Advisory Committee members also created and incorporated a stand-alone non- profit organization with the California Secretary of State in 1993.5 When originally constituted as the Women's Advisory Committee, its mandate was "to identify major economic, educational, and social concerns of women in Contra Costa County, and to reach and inform all women on a variety of issues." The name of the Women's Advisory Committee was changed to "Contra Costa Commission for Women" by Board Order on June 15, 1999. (c) CAO Staff Comment The Commission for Women was authorized in 1999 to have 26 seats. After it creation as an advisory body to the BOS, the members of the committee also created and incorporated a separate non-profit organization, with no direction to perform identified advisory duties for the Board of Supervisors. There has been confusion over the years about the distinction or the connection between the two entities. The most recent bylaws for the advisory body, approved by the Board of Supervisors (March 15, 2011), were submitted under the name of "Contra Costa Commission for Women" and provide that "CCCW shall have a minimum of fifteen (15) members and not more than (25) members." The advisory body bylaws provide, "the presence of fifty-one (51%) of the current membership at a regular meeting of the CCCW constitutes a quorum”. In the Commission's triennial review materials, its Board-appointed members (of which there are 11 currently approved) are reported to have attended meetings only sporadically. Eleven appointments by the BOS and eleven resignations (an equal number) were reported for the preceding 36-month Triennial Review period. Nonetheless, the commission reports that it has held 34 meetings over the 36 month reporting period, attended by at least 13 members. 5 The name of the non-profit corporation currently registered with the Secretary of State is "Friends of the Contra Costa Commission for Women." There is not a Contra Costa Commission for Women registered as a California non-profit. 184 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 21 The recent and current activities of the "Contra Costa Women's Commission" as described in the Triennial Review Materials reflect a focus on State, regional, and national policy trends, and do not specifically relate to the operations of County government. Although the Commission holds a variety of important and timely seminars and outreach events, its review materials do not show as clearly its meetings focused on the body’s role as an advisor to the Board of Supervisors. The Commission for Women reports establishing an effective presence as a non-profit organization even while its roles and responsibilities as an advisory body to the Board of Supervisors are less clear in the materials submitted. (d) CAO Staff Recommendation Consider asking the body to review its annual work plan and meeting agendas to be more in alignment to the roles and responsibilities of an advisory body to the Board of Supervisors. Consider restructuring the body’s charge from the BOS to include adopting a revised mandate; clarify the relationship of the Commission for Women +-to the non-profit Friends of the Contra Costa Commission for Women; and insure that the Commission, as an advisory body, satisfies all current public meeting requirements including the County's standard definition of a required quorum. B6. Health Services Department sponsored committees: Emergency Medical Care Committee -- Public and Environmental Health Advisory Board Emergency Medical Care Committee (a) The target population specified by the Committee is: "Residents and visitors." (b) Background In the Triennial Review materials submitted, the Committee describes its function as: "To assure the availability of an effective and efficient emergency medical services system that provides consistent, high-quality emergency medical services to all people in Contra Costa County." (c) CAO Staff Comment From the review materials submitted, this body appears to be an active and well-regarded advisory committee and is providing important services in coordinating the County's emergency medical care programs and services. 185 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 22 The current activities and scope of this Committee appear to exceed, however, the purposes of the body as originally described in Health and Safety Code Section [1797.270 - 1797.276].6 (d) CAO Staff Recommendation Continue this committee as currently structured, but consider transferring some of the body’s currant activities and work to the formal policy-making and oversight activities regarding emergency medical services that are conducted by the Board of Supervisors. Public and Environmental Health Advisory Board (a) The target population specified by the Committee is: none specified/no materials (b) Background The Public and Environmental Health Advisory Board was established in 1986 with the following goals: 1. Anticipate emerging health needs and initiate prevention programs. 2. Focus public health interventions in communities with greatest needs. 3. Balance available resources with growing needs; and 4. Advocate for increased County action to improve community health. (c) CAO Staff Comment No Triennial review materials were received for this Advisory Board. The Health Services Department reported that the Committee had stopped meeting and been outing on hiatus 6 California Health and Safety Code Section 1797.274: " The emergency medical care committee shall, at least annually, review the operations of each of the following: (a) Ambulance services operating within the county. (b) Emergency medical care offered within the county, including programs for training large numbers of people in cardiopulmonary resuscitation and lifesaving first aid techniques. (c) First aid practices in the county. California Health and Safety Code Section 1797.276: "Every emergency medical care committee shall, at least annually, report to the authority, and the local EMS agency its observations and recommendations relative to its review of the ambulance services, emergency medical care, and first aid practices, and programs for training people in cardiopulmonary resuscitation and lifesaving first aid techniques, and public participation in such programs in that county. The emergency medical care committee shall submit its observations and recommendations to the county board or boards of supervisors which it serves and shall act in an advisory capacity to the county board or boards of supervisors which it serves, and to the local EMS agency, on all matters relating to emergency medical services as directed by the board of supervisors." 186 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 23 for an indefinite period; there is currently no contract or county staff person assigned to the body. (d) CAO Staff Recommendation Request additional information from the Heath Services Department and reschedule PEHAB for additional review. B7. Historical Landmarks Advisory Committee (a) The target population specified by the Committee is: "Target populations served include owners and prospective purchasers of designated historic properties, owners and prospective purchasers of properties that may qualify for historic designation, neighbors and others affected by historic or landmark designations, local historic societies, local public/private agencies, local elected governments and staff." (b) Background In the Triennial review materials submitted, the Committee describes its function as: "The Historical Landmarks Advisory Committee was created for the following purpose: (1) Review and evaluate applications for the designation and registration of any historical building, landmark or historical site; (2) Recommend to the Board of Supervisors historical buildings, landmarks, and sites for placement on the Historical Resources Inventory (HRI); (3) Monitor the HRI in addition to previously registered historical resources in the County, and recommend to the Board of Supervisors those historical sites that should be registered as County historical landmarks and are qualified for historical markers; and, (4) Review applications and verify the historical evidence submitted by the applicant." (c) CAO Staff Comment The functions of the Committee appear to primarily involve assisting the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) to identify historic sites and to affect their formal registration as historical landmarks. No information was provided concerning the extent of this effort recently, or recent results. In the Triennial Review materials submitted, the advisory committee reported that it held six meetings over the previous 36-month period. (d) CAO Staff Recommendation The BOS might wish to discuss and reconsider the need for an existing non-profit organization, the Contra Costa County Historical Society, to serve formally as a separately- constituted advisory body to the Board of Supervisors (the HLAC's membership includes a seat for one County staff representative from DCD). Perhaps the Historical Society could be asked to continue to provide advisory functions to DCD as needed and/or to the Board of 187 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 24 Supervisors without being designated by the Board of Supervisors as an advisory committee. DCD could itself perform functions that are administrative in nature, such as reviewing applications. B8. Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee (a) The target population specified by the Committee is: "County Staff and the citizens of Contra Costa County (b) Background In the Triennial Review materials submitted, the Committee describes its function as: “A. Protect and enhance public health, County resources and the environment; B. Minimize risks and maximize benefits to the general public, staff and the environment as a result of pest control activities conducted by County staff and contractors; C. Promote a coordinated County-wide effort to implement Integrated Pest Management [IPM] in the County in a manner that is consistent with the Board-Adopted IPM Policy; D. Serve as a resource to help Department Heads and the Board of Supervisors review and improve pest management programs and the processes for making pest management decisions; E. Make policy recommendations upon assessment of current pest issues and evaluation of possible IPM solutions; and, F. Provide a forum for communication and information exchange among members [sic] in an effort in an effort to identify, encourage and stimulate the use of best or promising pest management practices.” (c) CAO Staff Comment The BOS created the Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee in 2009 based on the work of an earlier, less formal task force. Over the last several years the Advisory Committee has prepared a significant amount of research, analysis, data, and programmatic materials related to the County's integrated pest management program including input into the development of a 2012 Administrative Bulletin that created a formal County IPM policy. The Advisory Committee appears to have gradually undertaken more of a partnership role with County departments (Agriculture and Public Works), whom the Advisory Committee regards as its stakeholders. The IPM Committee appears to have focused a great deal of its work on evaluating the internal operations of these County departments, rather than providing advisory input to the Board of Supervisors on policy initiatives, or program alternatives for integrated pest management.7 7 The Board of Supervisors has the legal authority to direct and evaluate the operation of County departments; however, an advisory body that is appointed by the Board of Supervisors does not share such authority. The Board of Supervisors does not delegate its executive and administrative oversight functions to citizens' advisory bodies. Because these committees are 188 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 25 For instance, it was reported in the Triennial Review materials, that the advisory committee's work groups are structured to address "IPM Decision Making" and "IPM Program Transparency," which appear to be issues of operational concern, in addition to focusing on pest management issues (such as control of ground squirrels). The IPM Committee appears to be focusing narrowly on the operating procedures adopted by County staff and contractors as opposed to be focusing on providing the BOS with advice about the issues in the body’s purview. (d) CAO Staff Recommendation Continue in its present form, with the addition: In order to more effectively advise the Board of Supervisors on the complex range of technical, community relations, and internal operating issues that are related to the integrated pest management program, the Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee could begin publicizing its advisory findings and concerns by submitting written reports, or 'briefing papers', to both the CAO and the BOS on a regular basis. B7. Library Commission (a) The target population specified by the Library Commission (b) Background The Library Commission was created in 1991 by the Board of Supervisors, "with the agreement of the Contra Costa Mayors' Conference (refer to Board Order C.21 of 5/24/2011 for background and history.) Over the past 25 years the Library Commission has been re- authorized by the Board of Supervisors on a periodic basis. The Board of Supervisors and each of17 municipalities approve nominations to seats on the Library Commission, as listed in Board Order 2.2 of March 12, 1991. The Library Commission was last re-authorized by the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors (B.O. C.21, May 24, 2011) to remain active through 2016. Although communications from the Library Director in recent years have transmitted an Annual Report from the Library Commission, reports on matters of an advisory nature from the Library Commission itself to the BOS appear to not have been submitted or found in BOS records. advisory only, they do not direct or supervise County departments or managers, and must report their findings and recommendations directly to the Board of Supervisors. 189 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 26 In background information in support of the recent BOS re-authorization, the purpose of the Library Commission was described as follows (although the specific source of this mandate is not available): "To serve in an advisory capacity to the Board of Supervisors and the County Librarian; "to provide a community linkage to the County Library; "to establish a forum for the community to express its views regarding goals and operations of the County Library; "to assist the Board of Supervisors and the County Librarian to provide library services based on assessed public needs; and, "to develop and recommend proposals to the Board of Supervisors and the County Librarian for the betterment of the County Library including, but not limited to, such efforts as insuring a stable and adequate funding level for the libraries in the County. (c) CAO Staff Comments The County Library has recently been in transition to a new Library Director/Department Head, and neither the previous Librarian nor the commission members participated in this Triennial Review process by submitting the requested review materials. (d) CAO Staff Recommendation The CAO staff recommends that the Internal Operations Committee continue (postpone) its review of the Library Commission until the Triennial Review cycle in FY 2015-16. During this interval, the Library Commission and the new County Librarian can develop and complete Triennial Review materials and bring forward any organizational initiatives or problems affecting its goals or performance. These materials, to be reviewed in March - April 2016, could assist the Board of Supervisors and Contra Costa Mayors' Conference to assess the Library Commission's program and performance prior to the expiration of its current authorization period (through June 30, 2016). In addition, staff suggests the BOS request submission of the annual report and current work plan from the Library Commission and that submission of these materials be provided annually by the body to the BOS. 190 TRIENNIAL ADVISORY BODY REVIEW – PHASE I OF III April 8, 2015 Internal Operations Committee Page 27 CONCLUSION The County Administrator and Clerk of the Board's office will continue to emphasize the new advisory body policies and procedures including the Triennial Review procedure at the annual advisory body training meetings, so that all advisory bodies will more clearly understand the current reporting requirements. The training will clarify that all advisory committees must prepare (1) annual work plans, (2) Annual Reports to the Board of Supervisors, and (3) triennial review documents, as directed every three years. NEXT STEPS 1. APPROVE the recommendations contained in this report (for the committees that have been reviewed under the current triennial review cycle). 2. DIRECT the County Administrator to continue implementation with cycles two and three of the triennial review process for the remaining advisory bodies. 191