The Board of Supervisors appoints residents to approximately 75 active advisory boards, commissions, and committees (bodies). These bodies serve numerous governmental functions, some mandatory and others discretionary. In 2012, the Board of Supervisors adopted a regular, on-going sunset review process, formalized by Resolution No. 2012/261. Resolution No. 2012/261 was designed to ensure that every three years each advisory body is reviewed for compliance with a variety of policies.
With the publishing of this Phase 3, Cycle 2 report, the Internal Operations Committee has conducted two full cycles of review since the review process was installed in 2012. In 2018 and 2019, the Internal Operations Committee reviewed 14 advisory bodies in Phase I and 27 advisory bodies in Phase II of the review. This year, Internal Operations and the Board of Supervisors will review 17 bodies in Phase III. The County’s Maddy Book (Boards & Commissions appointments database) lists 75 bodies, meaning that 17 listed bodies were excluded from this Cycle of the Triennial Review.
Summary of Cycle 2 Triennial Review Phases
| Phase |
Year Completed |
Number of Bodies Included |
| 1 |
2018 |
14 |
| 2 |
2019 |
27 |
| 3 |
2020 |
17 |
| Excluded from Review |
17 |
| Total Bodies listed in Maddy Book |
75 |
A list of the 17 excluded bodies is below. Most excluded bodies were not reviewed due to full governing independence from the County, such as the East Bay Regional Park District’s own Parks Advisory Committee. A rationale is noted if the body is not independent and or is not explicitly explained in Resolution 2012/261. In those cases, the body was either Ad Hoc (temporary) body, or was not a true Maddy body. A body that is indicated below as “Not Maddy” is a body to which the Board of Supervisors does not make appointments but is listed in the Boards & Commissions Database (Maddy Book) to improve public awareness and access to the body’s meetings.
| Bodies Excluded from Triennial Review Cycle 2 |
Rationale |
| 1 |
Ad Hoc Census Committee |
Ad Hoc |
| 2 |
Assessment Appeals Board |
|
| 3 |
Community Advisory Board (CAB) on Public Safety Realignment |
Not Maddy |
| 4 |
Community Corrections Partnership |
|
| 5 |
Community Corrections Partnership - Executive Committee |
|
| 6 |
Contra Costa County Employees Retirement Association |
|
| 7 |
Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) Citizens Advisory Committee |
|
| 8 |
CCTA Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee |
|
| 9 |
County Connection Citizens Advisory Committee |
|
| 10 |
Countywide Redevelopment Oversight Board |
|
| 11 |
Developmental Disabilities Council |
Not Maddy |
| 12 |
East Bay Regional Park District Park Advisory Committee |
|
| 13 |
Housing Authority |
|
| 14 |
Mosquito & Vector Control District Board of Trustees |
|
| 15 |
Regional Measure 3 Independent Oversight Committee |
|
| 16 |
Tri-Delta Transit Authority Board of Directors |
|
| 17 |
Western Contra Costa Transit Authority Board of Directors |
|
List of Advisory Bodies in Phase III
Seventeen committees are included in Phase III, which was last completed in 2017.
Mandatory Commissions or Committees
Mandatory commissions include those required under state or federal law. Additionally, bodies that are mandated to exist by a contract with the federal, state, regional government, or bargaining unit are listed as mandatory, and are denoted with an asterisk. The following eleven advisory boards, councils, committees, and commissions are considered mandatory, meaning that Contra Costa County must operate the following bodies:
- Alamo-Lafayette Cemetery District Trustees
- Byron-Brentwood-Knightsen Union Cemetery District
- Fish & Wildlife Committee
- Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) Hearing Panel
- Managed Care Commission*
- Merit Board*
- North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee Committee
- Public Law Library Board of Trustees
- Resource Conservation District
- Workforce Development Board
Discretionary Commissions or Committees
Discretionary commissions are created by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on a voluntary basis. Many discretionary bodies were created to address community needs and solicit further resident engagement. Several of the discretionary bodies included in this phase advise the Board of Supervisors on how to allocate grant funds or fees. Others included in this phase advise the Supervisors on services, such as fire districts under the purview of the Board of Supervisors. A total of six (6) discretionary bodies were reviewed in this phase:
- Affordable Housing Finance Committee
- Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Advisory Commission
- Crockett-Carquinez Fire Protection District Fire Advisory Commission
- Iron Horse Corridor Management Program Advisory Committee
- Keller Canyon Mitigation Fund Review Committee
- Treasury Oversight Committee
|
Summary of Findings for Phase III
Staff to bodies included in Phase III were asked to complete a survey, reviewed and signed by the advisory body Chairperson. Staff from the Clerk of the Board reviewed the materials and surveys submitted by the advisory body staff and chairs. In addition to the survey materials, Clerk of the Board staff also went online to confirm whether the bodies are posting agendas online and reviewed the contents of the agendas for compliance with several additional policies. The policies include information about disability access, access to supplemental materials and materials submitted after the posting deadline, and opportunities for public comment. The Clerk of the Board also reviewed the agendas for whether the agenda descriptions were adequate for a layperson or outsider to understand what would be discussed at the meeting.
Unless highlighted in the Recommendations, no changes to bylaws, membership requirements, or seat structure are recommended for committees. This report includes a paraphrased description of advisory bodies in the Phase III review, along with a summary of comments or recommendations from the Clerk of the Board and the County Administrator’s Office.
Mandatory Bodies
Alamo-Lafayette Cemetery District Trustees
The Cemetery District is a property tax and fee-supported organization that provides burial services; year-round maintenance; and preservation of interment plots. Interments are restricted to residents and taxpayers of the cemetery district boundaries and their immediate family members. The District is controlled by the California State Health & Safety Code §9000. In the prior Cycle of the Triennial Review, District staff report that revenues received from property taxes and burial sales have been insufficient to cover operational expenses and the District Board is exploring alternatives to ensure continued financial viability.
Issues Outside the Purview of the Triennial Review
Staff reported one issue outside the purview of the Triennia Review that they would like additional assistance in resolving. The issue identified is the lack electrical connection needed to install an automatic entrance gate to the Lafayette Cemetery to prevent theft, dumping, and vandalism.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
Clerk of the Board notes that during the past three-year review period, the Trustees have updated their website to a newer page. The new page appears to include more information for the public and is user-friendly. They publish agendas at least 4 days (96 hours) ahead of meetings, and are posting online on their own site (https://www.alamolafayettecemetery.org/). Clerk of the Board recommends some minor changes to the current agendas, to ensure that they include information about disability access; how the public can access materials provided after publication; opportunities for public comment; and lastly, consider expanding their agenda descriptions to make discussion topics and proposed actions more clear to the general public. Beyond these minor recommendations, no changes are recommended to the Alamo-Lafayette Cemetery District Trustees.
Byron-Brentwood-Knightsen Cemetery District
The Cemetery District is a property tax and fee-supported organization that provides burial services, year-round maintenance, and preservation of interment plots. Interments are restricted to residents and taxpayers of the cemetery district boundaries and their immediate family members. The District is controlled by the California State Health & Safety Code §9000.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
Clerk of the Board recommends that the Trustees add information to their agenda about how to request disability access to their meetings. Aside from this recommendation, no changes are recommended to the Byron-Brentwood-Knightsen Cemetery District Trustees.
Fish and Wildlife Committee
The Fish and Wildlife Committee advises the Board of Supervisors on fish and wildlife issues and make recommendations for the expenditure of funds from the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund (Fish and Game Code Section 13103). The Fish & Wildlife Committee awards grants to projects related to public education, habitat improvement, temporary emergency treatment and care of orphaned wildlife and scientific research. Additionally, the committee may address issues surrounding the enforcement of fish and game laws and regulations when referred to the committee by the Board of Supervisors.
Issues Outside the Purview of the Triennial Review
The Fish and Game Code section 13103 G) states that secretarial service, travel and postage for this function may not exceed three percent of the average received in the fund for the previous three years or $3000, whichever is greater. Staff noted that the California Fish and Game Code Section 13103 allowance of $3,000 per year does not cover the cost of staffing the Committee and managing the grant program. Responsibilities of staffing the Committee include preparation of agendas, annual reports and work plans, grant administration, soliciting speakers, and organizing the Fall Forum. Outside governmental agencies cover staff and material expenses above $3,000 per year, which over the last 36-month period amounted to $139,345.65.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
The Fish & Wildlife Committee appears to be operating in-line with their establishing mandate and no major issues were identified as part of the Triennial Review. However, in order to partially address the funding issues outside of this review, the Committee may consider reducing meetings from 12 meetings per year to 6 meetings per year, resulting in reduced staff hours spent on meeting administration.
Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) Hearing Panel
In 1992, the Contra Costa County Environmental Health Division of the Contra Costa County Health Services Department was designated by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors and certified as the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) for Contra Costa County. The California Public Resources Code (PRC) requires an LEA to hold hearings (1) before taking certain actions, (2) in response to challenges to specified actions the LEA has taken, and (3) at the request of specified persons regarding particular actions taken by the LEA or the alleged failure of the LEA to act as required by law or regulation. Other hearings are required by the California Code of Regulations. Either a hearing officer or hearing panel must be appointed to conduct the hearings. The Board of Supervisors has established the Contra Costa County Local Enforcement Agency Independent Hearing Panel to perform this function under PRC section 44308, subdivision (a)(2).
Staff Comments/Recommendations
No changes are recommended to the LEA Hearing Panel. During the 36-month review period, the LEA Hearing Panel has only scheduled one meeting. While the Commission is mandated to exist and appears to be operating in compliance with County policies, it is worth noting that it is very rarely called upon to perform its mandated functions.
Managed Care Commission
This committee was established in 1995 with the goal of advising the Health Services Director and Board of Supervisors regarding health insurance needs for the community and to promote the Contra Costa Health Plan. The targeted populations within the county are recipients of Medi-Cal, Medicare, undocumented children and medically indigent persons. While the MCC is not considered a mandatory body, the County has effectively made it mandatory by entering into a contract with the State that requires the MCC to exist.
The Commission has 15 regular voting members. Persons who are involved as contractors with Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) and Health Department employees are not allowed to be members of the Managed Care Commission (MCC).
Current Seat Composition
The Commission is made up of the following membership, consisting of 15 voting members and several ex-officio, non-voting members:
- No less than one (1) Medi-Cal Subscriber, and
- One (1) Medicare Subscriber
- One (1) Commercial Subscriber
- One (1) person sensitive to medically indigent health care need
- One (1) physician, non-contracting
- One (1) other provider, non-contracting
- No less than nine (9) at-large members, non-contracting
- The Director of Health Services is an ex-officio, non-voting member
- The Chief Executive Officer of CCHP is an ex-officio, non-voting member
- The Board of Supervisors function as ex-officio, non-voting members.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
In 2017, the Triennial review of this commission results in a recommendation to add one additional seat for a Medicare subscriber for a senior or person with disabilities as this is required by the National Committee for Quality Assurance. Additionally, due to the challenge in finding physicians with sufficient time to serve on the Commission, it was recommended that this seat designation be broadened to a "medical provider" seat, which would allow Nurse Practitioners, Physician's Assistants and Optometrists to serve.
However, no action to update the bylaws has been taken since the prior review conducted in 2017. In the intervening time, the Commission has largely fallen out of compliance with the County’s appointments process and open meeting policies due in large part to staff turnover. Many seats have become vacant, and the Commission has found it difficult to meet regularly due to an inability to attain a quorum. The Managed Care Commission needs to take action to make appointments and reappointments to its seats, with nearly half of the seats currently unfilled.
With 15 regular voting seats, mostly with specific qualifications, the Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) Chief Executive Officer (CEO) reports that staff has encountered difficulty filling vacant seats. To address the large number of seats and the specificity of the seat qualifications, the CEO has reviewed the contractual requirements of the MCC and has recommended a structure that includes a fewer seats and a variety of alternates.
As the MCC performs many essential functions mandated in various state and federal contracts, sunsetting it is not a viable option. In order to address the structural issues, the seat composition must be changed.
Three main options exist with regards to the MCC’s structure:
- Maintain the status quo regarding seat composition: Previous rounds of the Triennial Review have recommended changes, and the current composition is resulting in difficulty finding qualified individuals to fill the seats.
- Reduce membership to eight (8) voting member seats, and include 8 at-large alternate seats, as recommended by the CCHP CEO. Eight (8) authorized voting seats will result in a quorum of 5 members. The CCHP team will need to provide recommendations on the qualifications for the various seats, to ensure that the proposed composition will comply with their Department of Health Care Services contract.
- Consider a modified version of the CCHP CEO’s recommendations, with either 7 or 9 regular voting seats, and several alternate seats. Unless otherwise specified in a contract or requirement, a 9-member Commission will have a quorum of 5 members, and a 7-member Commission will have a quorum of 4 members.
Merit Board
The Merit Board is authorized to carry out the duties of the Merit Board under the Merit System Ordinance (Ordinance No. 80-47), as required in State law. The Merit Board’s jurisdiction is to oversee the merit system and to hear and decide on matters of unlawful discrimination appeals or complaints, appeals from orders and actions of dismissal, suspension, demotion or reduction of compensation. They also hear and decide on other issues such as the application of the layoff regulations.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
The Merit Board appears to be well-administered and to be fulfilling its designated purpose. No changes are recommended to the Merit Board at this time.
North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee Committee
This committee has existed since 2004 as part of a Bulk Materials Processing Center Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Richmond to jointly administer mitigation fees collected from the Bulk Materials Processing Center at the West Contra Costa County Sanitary Landfill. The Environmental Impact Report for this project determined that this Center would impact the North Richmond community, and authorized a mitigation fee to defray annual costs associated with collection and disposal of illegally dumped waste and other related impacts.
The committee addresses the needs of the community through multiple strategies including community clean-up events, law and code enforcement activities, community garden projects and other community-based projects.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
The North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee Committee appears to be well-administered and operating in-line with its establishing mandate. No changes are recommended to the Committee at this time.
Public Law Library Board of Trustees
The Law Library's mission is to provide all members of the community access to research materials to aid in understanding and preserving legal rights at three full-time sites with the assistance of trained staff. The Board of Trustees governs the Law Library pursuant to the California Business and Professions Code 6300.
Issues Outside the Purview of the Triennial Review
As noted in the last cycle of the Triennial Review, the Public Law Library Board of Trustees reports declining revenues of county law libraries throughout California. Staff to the Law Library notes that budget cuts may threaten the future existence of these valuable agencies.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
The Public Law Library Board of Trustees appears to be well-managed and accomplishing its designated purpose. No changes are recommended at this time.
Resource Conservation District
The mission of the Contra Costa Resource Conservation District (RCD) is to facilitate conservation and stewardship of the natural resources of Contra Costa County. The RCD reports that their most impactful programs have included mobilizing hundreds of volunteers for creek cleanups, which has preventing tons of trash from entering our waterways and flowing downstream into SF Bay and the ocean. The RCD has built capacity for local watershed and creek groups such as the Walnut Creek Watershed Council, Alhambra Watershed Council, Carquinez Watershed Council, and Friends of Pinole Creek. Additionally, they have organized several community workdays to help eradicate an invasive reed species, Arundo donax. The RCD has partnered with several ranchers to restore livestock ponds which provide water for ranchers’ cattle and have the co-benefit of these ponds providing prime habitat for endangered species, California Red-Legged frog and California Tiger salamander. The RCD works with local ranchers to remove illegally dumped trash. Locally, the RCD works with a Federal partner (the National Resources Conservation Service) to implement conservation practices on agricultural and open space lands.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
The Resource Conservation District appears to be well-managed and accomplishing its designated purpose.
Workforce Development Board
The Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa County is the access point for employment-related and training services. These services, provided at four different sites, include developing local plans, identifying providers of services, monitoring system performance, and helping to develop the labor market information system. Priority is given to populations who have the greatest challenges to employment, such as low-income individuals, those formerly incarcerated, current and former foster youth, individuals with disabilities, and English language learners. Contra Costa County is required to operate an authorized workforce development board in order to received Federal funding for these activities.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
Last cycle, The Workforce Development Board recommended an update to its by-laws to align with changes to Federal legislation. The revised bylaws were approved by the Board of Supervisors on July 18, 2017. This review cycle, no changes are recommended to the Workforce Development Board.
Discretionary Bodies
Affordable Housing Finance Committee
Established in 1995, the AHFC works with the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) to develop funding recommendations for the Board of Supervisors consideration regarding the allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership Act (HOME) funds among eligible affordable housing programs and projects in the County. The County currently receives an annual allocation of approximately $6 million in funds for affordable housing development.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
The Affordable Housing Finance Committee appears to be fulfilling its mission and to be functioning properly. Staff within the Department of Conservation and Development would like to expand the committee's focus to include Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) funds, another U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development program administered by DCD staff. Based on the recommendation of DCD staff, Clerk of the Board staff recommends that the AHFC’s establishing documents and bylaws are updated, as needed, to allow the Committee to review and make recommendations on HOPWA projects. Allowing this well-administered Committee to expand its purview will prevent the creation of another duplicative body, while allowing community input on another important related topic.
The purpose of the Commission is to advise the Fire Chief and Board of Supervisors regarding goals and objectives of the District, the operations and capital budgets, and declarations of fire apparatus and equipment as surplus; and provide a liaison with the
community. The Commission also serves as the Appeals Board on weed abatement matters.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
The Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Advisory Commission appears to be fulfilling its mission and to be functioning properly. No changes are recommended to the Commission at this time.
Crockett-Carquinez Fire Protection District Advisory Commission
The Crockett-Carquinez Fire Protection District Advisory Commission reviews and advises on annual operations and capital budgets; reviews Fire District expenditures; advises the Fire Chief on district service matters; and serves as a liaison between the Board of Supervisors and the community served by the fire district.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
The Crockett-Carquinez Fire Protection District Advisory Commission does not have assistance from a full-time, permanent county staff person to support the administrative functions of the Commission. Consequently, the agendas are not being posted online, and numerous administrative issues are documented. Additionally, role confusion seems to exist, with some personnel and members uncertain about the purely advisory functions of the Commission, versus the decision-making authority of the Board of Directors (composed of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors). The Crockett-Carquinez Fire Protection District Advisory Commission has not filed an Annual Report with the Board of Supervisors during the timeframe examined for this Triennial Review. To rectify these issues, three main options exist:
1.Do not change staffing levels, but current staff must agree to rectify issues and commit to online posting of agendas at least 96 hours ahead of meetings. As a volunteer fire department, current staff does not appear to have the capacity to take on these functions. If this option is selected, Clerk of the Board staff recommends sending a memo instructing Crockett-Carquinez Fire Protection District members and staff on immediate changes need to become compliant with County policies.
2.Consider assigning administrative support functions to a full-time, permanent county staff person to assist with administrative responsibilities, such as online posting, retaining minutes, and tracking member training. However, the fiscal impact of the staffing, and logistics of which department is able to absorb this responsibility, is unknown.
3.Consider abolishing the Commission. Sunsetting the Commission would mean that a formal forum for community input about fires services no longer exists.
Iron Horse Corridor Management Program Advisory Committee
Established to provide citizen input for a management program for the Iron Horse Corridor. In October of 2000 the Board expanded the Advisory Committee's role to include continued implementation and monitoring of certain elements of the Management Program. The Committee meets only quarterly and accomplishes its interjurisdictional advisory duties on this schedule.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
The Iron Horse Corridor Management Program Advisory Committee appears to be well-administered and to be fulfilling its designated purpose. No changes are recommended for this Committee.
Keller Canyon Mitigation Fund Review Committee
The Keller Canyon Landfill Mitigation Fund process was established in August 1992, and the Board of Supervisors revised the funding process in May 2011. The Board of Supervisors designated that these funds be used to mitigate effects of the landfill site by funding community-based organizations and County Departments for programs in the following areas: youth services, code enforcement, community beautification, public safety, and community services. This Committee makes annual funding recommendations to the Board of Supervisors.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
The Keller Canyon Mitigation Fund Review Committee appears to be well-administered and to be fulfilling its designated purpose. No changes are recommended to the Keller Canyon Mitigation Fund Review Committee at this time.
Treasury Oversight Committee
The Board established this committee on November 6, 1995 and was initially mandated under the Government Code, although the requirement was suspended by the State in 2004. The Treasury Oversight Committee allows local agencies, including school and special districts, as well as the public, to participate in reviewing the policies that guide the investment of public funds that are invested by the County Treasurer. The committee monitors the County's investment pool and policy and confirms that the annual audit is conducted to ensure compliance with Government Code 27130-27137. The Treasurer has recommended the committee continue to exist to allow the public to participate in the review of policies that guide the investment of public funds under the authority granted annually by the Board of Supervisors.
Staff Comments/Recommendations
The Treasury Oversight Committee (TOC) appears to be well-administered and to be fulfilling its designated purpose. No changes are recommended to the TOC at this time.
|