Application to Packard Foundation by Pogo Park

APPLICATION Mission Investing Team The David and Lucile Packard Foundation

April 21, 2020

THE DAVID AND LUCILE PACKARD FOUNDATION MISSION INVESTING - APPLICATION COVER SHEET: Name of Organization (Proposed Borrower): Pogo Park Project Title: Accounts Receivable Loan for the HARBOUR-8 PARK EXPANSION PROJECT Summary and Purpose of Proposed MI [1-3 sentences]: Pogo Park requests a $600,000 loan from the MI Team at David and Lucille Packard Foundation to have the financial capacity to execute a $1.4 million reimbursable design contract from the City of Richmond. Pogo Park's specific contract deliverable is to develop the design for the "Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project." Pogo Park's design contract with the City of Richmond is on a reimbursable basis – meaning that Pogo Park must pay project costs and expenses up front – and then have the financial capacity to wait an 30-90 days for reimbursement. A loan, backed by accounts-receivable, will bridge this financing gap. Harbour-8 Park is located in the heart of one of the San Francisco Bay Area's toughest inner-city neighborhoods (Richmond's "Iron Triangle") – a low-income neighborhood of color that is considered "park poor" and whose whose residents suffer from a critical lack of functional urban green spaces. Pogo Park's proposed developments to Harbour-8 Park will provide thousands of California's most vulnerable residents with a safe, green, and vibrant public park to play, exercise, and gather as a community. Requested MI Amount: $600,000 Type of Entity of Applicant: X Nonprofit Jurisdiction of Applicant’s Organization: Tax Status of Applicant:

For Profit

Other ____________

X U.S. | State: California Foreign (Country: ____________)

X Tax Exempt, under Section 501(c)(3) of Internal Revenue Code Taxable Entity under Internal Revenue Code

Is Applicant a “supporting organization” under Section 509(a) of the Internal Revenue Code? NO If Applicant is a “supporting organization,” indicate type: Type I supporting organization under IRC Section 4966(d)(4)(B)(i) Type II supporting organization under IRC Section 4966(d)(4)(B)(ii) Type III supporting organization under IRC Section 4943(f)(5)(A) Functionally integrated Type III supporting organization under IRC Section 4943(f)(5)(B). Type of MI requested: Foundation Program Officer: Foundation Program Area: Subprogram Area:

X Loan

Guarantee

Other: _________

Walt Reid Conservation and Science Western Conservation/California Conservation Innovations

Briefly describe how the proposed MI addresses the Foundation’s Program and Sub-Program goals: The Harbour-8 Expansion Project will transform a once-abandoned and neglected city park in Richmond, California into a vibrant and thriving urban green space. A safe, green, and functional Harbour-8 Park will benefit thousands of low-income residents who, until Pogo Park came along, had no functional green spaces to play, recreate, and gather together as a community. The Harbour-8 Expansion Project is also an engine for jobs and training for local residents: Pogo Park will hire, train, and empower people from the community to design, build, and manage Harbour-8 Park. Pogo Park's "built from the inside/out" development model deeply engages community members and promotes community ownership. Applicant Contact Information: Applicant (Proposed Borrower) Lead/Program Contact: Toody Maher | Executive Director | Pogo Park Address: 2604 Roosevelt Avenue, Richmond, CA 94804-1623 Phone: (510) 215-5500 - office | (510) 590-1716 - mobile Fax: (510) 215-5600 Email: toody@pogopark.org Web site: www.pogopark.org Financial Contact: Debbie Polito | Bookkeeper | Pogo Park Address: 2604 Roosevelt Avenue, Richmond, CA 94804-1623 Phone: (510) 215-5500 - office Fax: (510) 215-5600 Email: debbie@pogopark.org Web site: www.pogopark.org Signatory Contact: Denise Yamamoto | President, Board of Directors | Pogo Park Address: 2604 Roosevelt Avenue, Richmond, CA 94804-1623 Phone: (510) 459-3019 - mobile Fax: (510) 215-5600 Email: denise@yonger.net Web site: www.pogopark.org

Signed [by Executive Director/President/CEO of Proposed Borrower (or Investee), to verify that proposal and all attachments are accurate and complete:

By Its Toody Maher | Executive Director

PROPOSAL INFORMATION: Provide a narrative description of the MI proposal (no more than ten pages in length), with sections that address each of the following components: 1.

Applicant Background. Provide a description of applicant organization, including year applicant was founded, number and location of offices, number of staff, and description of mission and programs. Provide a description of applicant organization including year applicant was founded: Founded in 2007 and based in Richmond, California , Pogo Park is a grass-roots, entrepreneurial community development corporation operating as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Number and location of offices: Pogo Park work is focused on improviding the quality of urban green space in Richmond's "Iron Triangle" neighborhood. Pogo Park has four office locations in Richmond; three are located in the Iron Triangle: ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE Pogo Park 2604 Roosevelt Avenue Richmond, CA 94804 ELM PLAYLOT (POGO PARK #1) - Iron Triangle 720 Elm Avenue Richmond, CA 94801 HARBOUR-8 PARK (POGO PARK #2) - Iron Triangle 909 Ohio Avenue Richmond, CA 94804 POGO PARK PRODUCTS (A social enterprise of Pogo Park) - Iron Triangle c/o Scientific Art Studio 500 B Street Richmond, CA 984801 Number of staff: 20 people total, comprised of 9 full-time and 11 part-time staff Description of Mission and Programs: MISSION: To transform lives by transforming public space. PROGRAMS: Program 1: Community Design, Build, & Operate Pogo Park works shoulder-to-shoulder with a core team of community residents – those who know their neighborhood best – to reimagine, rethink, and rebuild public spaces (e.g. city parks and streets) into safe, vibrant, and urban green spaces. For 13 years, we organized and work with community residents who make up Pogo Park's "Community Development Team" (CDT) to transform two parks in the Iron Triangle: Elm Playlot on 8th and Elm, and Harbour-8 Park on a two block section of the Richmond Greenway. Additionally, Pogo Park and the CDT are working with the city of Richmond and a team of top transportation engineers to design and build the "Yellow Brick Road" – a safe bike and walking path through the Iron Triangle neighborhood that will connect our two Pogo Parks together.

Program 2: Parks as Community Hubs That Foster the Healthy Development of Children & Support Parents Pogo Park CDT staff our parks, cleans and maintains them, welcomes visitors, and provides enriched play programs/activities for children and support services for parents for no charge and on a drop-in basis. Our Iron Triangle parks have become sanctuaries, green oases, for thousands of low-income residents who lack safe and green public spaces to be outside. Program 3: Workforce / Economic / Community Development Pogo Park directs grant monies down, into the community, to hire, train, and empower community residents themselves to redesign and rebuild city parks in the own community. Our projects are powerful vehicles for workforce development (we create jobs and job training for local people); economic development (we provide living-wage jobs for local people and contracts for local businesses); and community development (we actualize a rarely-seen model for what comprehensive, holistic, from the inside/out, community development looks like). Program 4: Elm Playlot Research Study Pogo Park partnered with UC Berkeley professor Dr. Jason Corburn and his team of researchers to "measure the multiple impacts of Elm Playlot on community health and well-being." Supported by a grant from Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the results of this comprehensive, two year study will be published in 2020-2021. 2.

The Need or Opportunity to be Addressed: a.

Provide a summary description of the specific need or opportunity to be addressed by the Proposed MI [25 words or less]. An MI loan will address the critical need to build functional green parks in one of California's most disadvantaged neighborhoods, Richmond's Iron Triangle. Provide more detailed description of the need, opportunity, or specific financing gap to be served, including market data or other supporting information, and organizations past experience in addressing similar needs. The Need: – Critical lacks of Park Space: the neighborhood surrounding Pogo Park's Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project suffers from a critical lack of park space (currently 2.98 acres per 1,000 residents). – Significant Poverty: 1 in 3 families lives below the federal poverty line. – Environmental Degradation: Located directly adjacent to four of the worst emitters of toxic air pollution in the San Francisco Bay Area (Chevron Refinery, BNSF Railway, Richmond Parkway, and Port of Richmond), Iron Triangle ranks in the top 10% of California's most environmentally degraded census tracts. – High Levels of Violence: Recently, Iron Triangle was ranked the 7th most violent neighborhood in America. Families long for safe public spaces to gather together outside that are free from the persistent and real threat of gun violence. – Lack of Workforce Skills: 43% of Iron Triangle adults over age 25 failed to complete high school. Many adults lack the 21rst century skills required to join the 21rst century workplace. Consequently many Iron Triangle residents are unemployed or under-employed. – Poor Health: Children of the Iron Triangle rank at the bottom of virtually every major public health indicator that includes: obesity (Richmond ranked #5 for obesity rates in California cities); asthma (top 2% of all California cities for asthma rates). – Social Isolation: Many Latinx families are undocumented, live in the shadows, and suffer from constant fear of deportation and a lack of public places to gather safely with other community families.

The Opportunity: After a decade of working to make parks in one of America's toughest inner-city neighborhoods come alive, Pogo Park created a strong, dedicated, experienced team of partners that include: – The City of Richmond: Every level of city government – from the Mayor, to the City Council, to the head of every city department (engineering, planning, public works, parks, recreation, police, fire, training, arts & culture etc.) is 100% behind Pogo Park's major community transformation project (building two "Pogo Parks" and connecting them by the Yellow Brick Road). – The Community: After witnessing a decade of community development / park renovation projects fail to make the type of transformative change they were heralded to be, the community is 100% behind Pogo Park's projects. Why? Because they deeply involve the local community in every facet of the projects development – from planning, to design, to building, and finally to managing and operating these transformed public spaces. – Local Businesses: Local design and construction businesses, eager to contribute and play a part in the renaissance of Richmond, continue to provide expertise and support for Pogo Park's construction projects. One of those businesses include Scientific Art Studio (SAS), a two-acre custom fabrication shop in the Iron Triangle neighborhood that is famous for building the iconic mitt at the SF Giants ballpark and new, cutting-edge playgrounds for the SF Zoo, Oakland Zoo, Jewish Community Center, and Bay Area Discovery Museum. SAS provides a sheltered and supportive environment for Pogo Park's "Community Development Team" (all local residents) to learn welding, woodwork, sculpting, casting, modeling...and much more. – Foundations and Nonprofit Partners: Pogo Park's work of rebuilding parks in the Iron Triangle neighborhood as a vehicle to rebuild the community "from the inside/out" has attracted support from key foundations (The California Endowment, Chevron, Kaiser, The San Francisco Foundation) and nonprofit partners (The Conservation Fund, The Trust for Public Land). Specific Financing Gap: As a way to support the cost of staffing our parks, providing high-quality park programs and activities, and performing maintenance and repairs, Pogo Park launched "Pogo Park Products," a social enterprise of Pogo Park. Pogo Park Products does two things: 1) it designs and builds parks with high quality children's play environments and 2) it sells its own produce line of park amenities and play elements. Pogo Park Products has two main goals: 1) to create jobs and training opportunities for Richmond residents with barriers to employment; and 2) to generate earned income to help contribute to the ongoing costs of running our parks. Pogo Park Products secured two major contracts to design and build a section of Harbour-8 Park (as detailed in the Cover Page above). However, these contracts are both reimbursable contracts – meaning that Pogo Park must incur the design/build expenses ourselves, invoice for those expenses paid, and then wait for reimbursement. In some cases, this process can take up to 60 days. Pogo Park seeks support to bridge this financial gap. c.

Document the expected outcomes if no Foundation MI is forthcoming. If no Foundation MI is forthcoming, Pogo Park will look for other sources of accounts receivable financing.

Specific Request/Proposed Use of MI (loan or equity investment):

a. Describe in detail the project or activities to be funded, including current status, implementation plan, and timing. ACTIVITES TO BE FUNDED

CURRENT STATUS

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

TIMING

Pogo Park is assembling a core team of professional and licensed experts (architect, landscape architect, mechanical engineer, structural engineer etc.) to assist us in developing the final schematic design/construction documents for the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project.

DESIGN DEVELOPMENT Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project

Pogo Park will enter into an estimated $1.4 million contract with the City of Richmond in June 2020 to organize, lead, and administer the efforts to: a) engage with community residents to produce a final conceptual design for Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project b) produce a schematic design; and c) produce a full set of construction documents for the entire project to submit to the City of Richmond in early 2021 to secure a building permit.

Currently Pogo Park and our partners (see above) are working together to produce multiple items that include: a detailed budget and cost estimate; a detailed task lisk; a detailed timeline; an information chart that shows how information travels from party to party; a $ flow chart detailing how funding for the project flows; and a detailed organizational chart that identifies the type and number of jobs this Project will create for community residents.

Pogo Park will enter into a 1-year design contract with the City of Richmond in June 2020.

We are using the time during the current shelter-in-place order as an opportunity to work together remotely and plan every step of the process needed to successfully execute this city contract. When the current shelter in place is lifted, we will have everything lined up and ready to roll.

b. If the MI will fund a new or expanded venture/activity/line of business, attach a detailed business plan with financial projections. n/a

c. Itemize the goals and expected outcomes of the proposed MI, including specific measures and milestones for determining project success. GOALS & OUTCOMES

MEASUREMENT / MILESTONES

Enter into a contract with the city of Richmond that makes Pogo Park the prime vendor, the lead entity, that will manage and lead the efforts to produce the final design and a set of construction documents for the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project.

Entering into a design contract with the City of Richmond in June 2020.

Hire, train, and empower community residents to work shoulder-to-shoulder with our design partners; empower community residents to have a seat at the table and a voice in all key decisions that impact and shape the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project – a park in their community.

Hire 15 community residents to work on the Project an average of 25 hours per week for 6 months and earn a living wage. Estimated number of hours for community resident = 9,000. Estimated amount of wages invested in the local community: $162,400

Direct contracts to local Richmond businesses to ensure funds from contracts are reinvested and circle back into the community.

Award three contracts to local businesses worth an estimated $250,000.

Describe other funding partners for the project or activity to be funded through the MI, including currently committed funding and potential new sources to be leveraged through the proposed MI. Describe if and how the requested MI will serve as a catalyst for other funders and/or the development of new activities or financing in the market over the longer term. The Harbour-8 Park Expansion project is attracting additional investment from a range of funding partners that include: The California Endowment, The San Francisco Foundation, East Bay Community Foundation, Sunlight Giving Foundation, Hellman Family Foundation, Dean and Margaret Lesher Foundation, and through individuals who support this project by giving through their personal donor-advised funds. A Mission Investment from Packard for the Harbour-8 Park Improvement Project will help Pogo Park catalyze and leverage funding from others to support the cost of the following: 1) Workforce development (Providing jobs, job training, and opportunity for community residents.) 2) Economic development (Building a base of local businesses to work on the Project.) 3) Community empowerment (Engaging with and empowering community residents to ensure they have a seat a the table and a voice in key decisions that affect their own community.) 4) Core operating support (Building and strengthening Pogo Park's core capacity and ability to perform on this Project.) If Pogo Park can execute this design contract successfully and demonstrate that we have the financial and organizational capability to be the "prime" vendor, will position ourselves as a go-to vendor for future projects. The reason we want Pogo Park to be the "prime" vendor on city contracts is because the prime contractor controls the project – and flow of monies. By controlling flow of money, Pogo Park can direct funds down, back into the community in the form of local wages and local contracts, to "lift up the people at the same time we lift up the place" (quote from a community resident). Rather than directing monies from contracts simply to beautify and

make improvements to a neighborhood, the investment, if directed consciously and intentionally, can be transformative. Justification of MI Amount: Outline the method for determining the requested amount and describe why this amount is needed to achieve the proposed outcomes. What would be the results of a reduced MI amount? Pogo Park worked closely with expert costs estimators, Robert Stevens from CSWST, Manil Bajracharya from mack5, and Hank Levy, CPA and Treasurer of Pogo Park's Board of Directors, to determine that Pogo Park requires $600,000 in additional cash-flow to be able to perform on the City of Richmond's $1.4 million reimbursable contract for Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project. If MI reduced the loan amount, we would need to look to other sources to raise the additional funding. Proposed MI Terms: Summarize the requested terms of the MI, including financing structure (loan or other), interest rate, term/length, and recourse/security. Describe why these terms are needed to achieve the programmatic outcomes. Pogo Park requests a $600,000 loan, secured by accounts receivable from the City of Richmond's Harbour-8 Park design contract, for a term of 12 months, at .05% interest. Sources of Repayment: Provide a detailed description of all source(s) for repayment of the proposed MI, including backup and contingency repayment sources and projected timing, status and probability of each source of loan repayment. Provide supporting documentation for how these repayment sources will be achieved, e.g. capitalraising plan, list of prospects, status of commitments, and actions required for securing future commitments.

SOURCES OF REPAYMENT Reimbursement From Contract (primary source of

AMOUNT

TIMING

STATUS

City of Richmond - Design Contract for H-8 Park

$1,400,000

Sept 2020 - May 2021

Pledged

Individual donors

$50,000

June 2020 - May 2021

Likely

Business donors

$25,000

June 2020 - May 2021

Likely

Sunlight Giving Foundation

$50,000

June 2020 - May 2021

Pledged

East Bay Community Foundation

$20,000

June 2020 - May 2021

Pledged

San Francisco Foundation

$35,000

June 2020 - May 2021

Likely

Kaiser Permanente - Community Benefits

$25,000

June 2020 - May 2021

Likely

The California Endowment

$125,000

May 2020 - April 2021

Pledged

Ken Birdwell Foundation

$150,000

March 2021

Likely

$25,000

June 2020 - May 2021

Pledged

repayment

Capital Campaign (contingency sources of repayment)

Foundations

Hellman Foundation TOTAL SOURCES OF REPAYMENT

$1,905,000

Please note that Pogo Park enjoys excellent relationships with all the key funders and donors (business and individuals) listed above. We are confident in our ability to raise the funds to repay Packard's potential $600,000 loan to Pogo Park. We are partnering with Richmond Chamber of Commerce and Richmond Rotary to approach the business community to invest in the Harbour-8 Expansion Project. Additionally, Pogo Park's Board of Directors is marshalling the effort to tap into their network of individual donors to invest in the development of Harbour-8 Park Expansion. Pogo Park successfully repaid a $350,000 loan to MI Team at Packard Foundation; we are confident in our ability to repay this subsequent loan!

Risk Factors. Provide a description of all market and other risk factors associated with the project or activities to be funded through the MI, and with the applicant’s proposed MI repayment plan. Describe how each of these risks to implementation and repayment will be addressed. There are two risks associated with Pogo Park's ability to repay this proposed loan. Risk Factor #1: Pogo Park fails to generate the funds needed to repay the Packard loan through: a) reimbursement from the City contract; b) grants from foundations, and c) donations from individuals and businesses. Although failing to raise the funds needed to pay back this loan is indeed a risk, the risk is unlikely. This particular loan provides the bridge financing required for Pogo Park to execute a reimbursable contract from the City of Richmond. Once Pogo Park expends funds for the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project, Pogo Park will invoice the City for those expenditures – and will be repaid. The City's reimbursement to Pogo Park for Project expenditures will provide the necessary income to repay the Packard loan. Risk #2: Executive Director, Toody Maher, left Pogo Park. Not having Toody direct this Project would pose a risk to the smooth execution of the City's contract. Toody plans to continue working at Pogo Park and leading this Project, the only way that she would no longer work at Pogo Park is if she became disabled or died. With that in mind, Pogo Park's Board of Directors is exploring various options that include: 1) helping to raise additional funds to hire another experienced manager to help Toody manage the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project; and 2) purchasing a life insurance policy for Toody that names Pogo Park as the beneficiary. In case of her death, Pogo Park would use the payment from the life insurance to repay the MI loan to Packard. 4. Contingencies: Describe any outstanding contingencies and/or legal issues requiring resolution prior to MI funding. None. Principal Staff. Provide a list of the principal staff who will be responsible for implementing the proposal, with a brief description of their backgrounds and qualifications. Toody Maher, Executive Director: Toody is an artist, inventor, and entrepreneur. After graduating from UC Berkeley in 1983, Toody secured the distribution rights to Swatch Watch in the 11 Western States. She set up the regional office, pioneered Swatch’s product launch, and helped to drive sales in her region from $0 in 1983 to $30 million in 1986. After Swatch, she founded a new start-up, Fun Products, which created the world’s first clear telephone with lights (named one of Fortune Magazine’s “Product of the Year” in 1990). In 1990, Toody was named one of Inc. Magazine’s “Entrepreneur of the Year.” Later, she became the Business Director at Juma Ventures, a San Francisco nonprofit that operates businesses that provide jobs and job training to at-risk youth. At Juma, Toody created a series of social enterprise businesses, most notably a Ben & Jerry’s ice cream concession at the Giants and ’49ers ballparks that employed 200 at-risk youth each year, ages 14-21, from San Francisco’s BayviewHunter’s Point and Mission districts. Thereafter, Toody invented, developed, and patented a number of different products and either sold or licensed them to other companies. She worked as a consultant on a project for a research institute at UCLA, helping to translate their scientific, evidence-based research into formats that people can actually use. It was during this project, when she was working on ways to the overall health and well-being in communities, that she realized that city parks – if properly designed and managed – were a potent vehicle to transform entire communities. This realization led her to found Pogo Park in 2007. Toody has been the recipient of several awards including The Jefferson Award for Public Service, The Comcast Local Hero Award, The Sui Generis Award, and The Woman of the Year for the California Assembly.

James Anderson, Green Team, Design/Build Team: James is the leader of Pogo Park's Green Team (which performs general landscaping and maintenance) and is also a member of Pogo Park's Design/Build Team (which designs and builds parks and children's playspaces). Working with Pogo Park for over five years, James will be a key leader in the effort to create a design for Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project. Ron Holthuysen, Maren Van Duyn, Scientific Art Studio: Ron and Maren, husband and wife, are artists and the founders/owners of Scientific Art Studio, a world-famous, custom fabrication shop in Richmond's Iron Triangle neighborhood. With 70 years of collective experience designing and building custom products for clients all over the world, Ron and Maren have dedicated a significant portion of their studio to providing a sheltered, supportive environment and hands-on support for 15 members of Pogo Park's Community Development Team (CDT). Members of Pogo Park's CDT to learn basic skills while designing and building parks in their own community. SAS is a key partner in the Harbour-8 Park project. Tom Lawrence, Lawrence Construction Inc.: Tom Lawrence is a licensed general contractor with 50 years experience in building and construction. For the past five years, Lawrence Construction provided rent-free space in their yard, next to Harbour-8 Park, for Pogo Park to install shipping containers to store tools and supplies. Lawrence Construction's Team of skilled carpenters, electricians, and woodworkers work alongside Pogo Park's CDT and provide training and support for Pogo Park's design/build projects. Lawrence Construction will function as the general contractor on the development of Harbour-8 Park. Marcia Vallier, Vallier Design Associates.: Marcia Vallier is a licensed landscape architect with 35 years experience in landscape architecture and planning. She is an expert in master planning and design guidelines, site design, construction documentation, and project planning and management. Marcia and her team have worked with Pogo Park's CDT on multiple projects and will continue to play a significant role in the development of Harbour-8 Park.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION: In addition to the narrative proposal information described above, applicant should provide copies of the following supporting documents with its completed MI application: A.

Project Documents: A-1

All project documents relating to the MI request. For example, if the Project involves the acquisition of real property, project documents will include any option agreement or purchase and sales agreement relating to the acquisition, a current independent appraisal of the fair market value of the property, a current preliminary title report for the property together with a copy of all recorded documents referred to in the title report, a phase one environmental site assessment for the property, and any unrecorded leases, contracts or other agreements relating to the property. Attached - Pogo Park's successful "Prop 68" grant application to the State of California's Department of Parks and Recreation for the Harbour-8 Expansion Project. This grant application details the rationale, vision, and plan to make major improvements to Harbour-8 Park.

A-2

All documents relating to any other funding sources for the project. Attached

A-3

Maps and photos of proposed project, as applicable. Attached

Applicant’s Financial Information: B-1

Applicant’s audited financial statements for the past three years, together with auditor’s management letter(s) for applicant’s most recent audit. With less than $2 million in revenues, the IRS does not require Pogo Park to provide auditied financial statements. Please note that Pogo Park prides itself on having strong financial systems and accurate, up-to-the minute, financial reporting. Two members of Pogo Park's board of directors are MBA's and experts in finance. They, along with the treasurer of Pogo Park's board, Hank Levy, is a CPA (and also the Treasurer of Alameda County), have hands-on oversight of all financial transactions and reporting.

B-2

Applicant’s unaudited financial statements for the prior fiscal year if audited financial statements provided under B-1 are not completed for that year, in addition to interim financial statements for the current fiscal year. Attached

B-3

Applicant’s operating budget for the current year. Attached

B-4

Applicant’s most recent Form 990 filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Attached

B-5

Schedule of all Packard Foundation grants received by applicant within the past three years, detailing grant amount, and brief description of grant project. n/a

B-6

Schedule of all Foundation PRIs/MIs received by applicant, detailing amount, brief description of MI project, and repayment status. Attached. Background of Another Complimentary Project: In 2016, Pogo Park partnered with The Conservation Fund to acquire 17,500 square feet of land adjacent to Harbour-8 Park in Richmond. The Conservation Fund secured a PRI/MI investment from Packard to acquire this parcel. Pogo Park submitted a successful $8.5 million "Prop 68" grant from the State of California Parks and Recreation Department. That grant flows to the city of Richmond who will, in turn, acquire a portion of that land parcel currently owned by The Conservation Fund. The Fund will use the proceeds from the sale of that property to repay the loan to Packard.

C. Applicant’s Organizational Documents: C-1

All organizational documents for applicant. For example, if the Applicant is a corporation, this will include the articles of incorporation, bylaws and resolutions approved by the Applicant’s Board of Directors approving the Project and the MI request. Articles of Incorporation and bylaws are attached; a board resolution approving the MI request is forthcoming.

C-2 Brief biographical description of each director and/or trustee serving on applicant’s Board of Directors and/or Board of Trustees. Denise Yamamoto, Board President: Denise is a pioneer and consultant in the field of social entrepreneurship, and has been at the forefront of the movement since it began. While receiving her MBA from University of California at Berkeley, she helped organize the very first Haas Social Venture Business Plan Competition, a global competition for mission-driven business ventures that promote social responsibility and economic profitability—that is now the largest such competition in the world. After receiving her MBA, Denise went on to help define the very meaning of social innovation in a number of critical positions: She was a Farber Fellow and business director at CVE, Inc., a San Francisco nonprofit that provides jobs and training to people with mental health disabilities. She also worked with the Grameen Fund, Bangladesh’s first venture capital fund, the National Park Service and the National Parks and Conservation Association, and is currently the chairperson of the Advisory Board of BUILD. Denise has a background in finance and before finding her passion for social enterprise, she worked for Barclays Global Investors and was the international equity portfolio manager in the firm’s Alpha Strategies Group. Hank Levy CPA, Board Treasurer: Hank currently serves as County Treasurer-Tax Collector for Alameda County. A deeply respected source of tax information, Hank possesses a broad range of expertise and talent in business consulting and tax planning for over 30 years, including family law and civil litigation. After growing up in New York City and obtaining a degree from Swarthmore College, Hank moved out west where he obtained a Master’s Degree before going on to work for CPA firms, ultimately opening his own practice. The Henry Levy Group includes 30 employees, with four partners and five offices in Northern California. Hank teaches and lectures frequently, is widely quoted as an expert in publications, and appears as a witness for forensic accounting. Gus Newport, Board Member: From his early days as a civil rights activist alongside Malcolm X to his current role as a community economic-development consultant, Gus Newport has always been a champion of the people, helping to frame the nature of grassroots community organizing to benefit the underserved. Among his many notable distinctions are his roots in the civil rights movement, where he befriended Malcolm X and Adam Clayton Powell and helped found the Organization of African American Unity in 1964 before Malcolm X was assassinated in 1965.

After serving as mayor of the city of Berkeley for seven years, Gus became director of the Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative (DSNI) project in Boston, the very first example of an underserved community taking back their neighborhood. Under Gus’s direction the DSNI was able to purchase large properties using eminent domain, allowing local residents to buy homes at affordable costs. The program—which has been ongoing in Boston since 1984—laid the groundwork for what is possible when a neighborhood is run “by and for the people.” Gus has continued to serve on numerous governmental and nonprofit agencies including the advisory board to New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina; as faculty of higher education institutions such as Yale, M.I.T., and the University of California; and as a member of U.N. delegations advocating peace and justice. A father of two and resident of Berkeley, most recently Gus has been on the leadership committee of the National Council of Elders, an organization comprised solely of people over 65—each of whom played pivotal roles in the social justice movements of the 20th century—including civil rights, women’s rights, environmental rights, farm workers’ rights, and gay and lesbian rights. Ali Nazar, Board Member: Ali is a technologist and savvy mathematician who uses his brainpower to enable high performing teams via algorithms and process excellence. A Bay Area native and UC Davis graduate, Ali has been involved in five startups dating back to the birth of the internet, using his unique skillset to disrupt several industries while taking multiple companies to an IPO. Ali is currently Chief Operating Officer of Mynd, a tech enabled real estate startup in Oakland. With passions that run deeper than material success, Ali took a two-year break from working after 9/11 to explore his Muslim roots, traveling throughout his home country of Pakistan and other Islamic countries to connect with the past. In his novel “The 5 Pillars: A Journey through the Modern Muslim World,” written after his trip, Ali explores his Muslim identity. Ali has also distinguished himself as a weekly DJ and host of KALX’s A Method to the Madness, featuring interviews with innovative entrepreneurs. Ali is a father of three and resident of Berkeley. Shyaam Shabaka, Board Member: Shyaam is the founder and executive director of EcoVillage Farm Learning Center. He has more than 40 years of leadership experience in public health, sustainable urban agriculture, environmental, social and economic justice in low-income communities. After 28 years as a director in the City of Berkeley’s Health and Human Services Department, Shyaam retired and decided to put his passions to work with inner-city youth. In order to create a hands-on nature experience for children, Shyaam partnered with several foundations to establish a five acre eco-farm in the heart of Richmond. Eco Village has been a teaching center, engaging over 5,000 urban kids in the sustainable raising of honey bees, tomatoes, oranges and pumpkins. Shyaam holds a B.S. from Texas Western College at University of Texas at El Paso and a Masters of Public Health from UC Berkeley. For his many contributions, he’s received numerous community service awards; served in the Peace Corps in Nigeria; and sat on the Boards of Food First, International Child Resource Institute, California Food and Justice Coalition, Consumer Cooperative Federal Credit Union, and Oakland Community Action Partnership to Combat Poverty. A native of Texarkana, AK, Shyaam lives in Richmond, and joined the board of Pogo Park because he is a strong believer in the system approach to problem solving rather than the “quick fix,” “band-aid” or “treating the symptoms” approaches and he believes Pogo Park is on the right track. Ian Fraser, Board Member: As co-founder of the popular scavenger hunt cellphone based game, The Go Game, Ian is a visionary and forward thinking entrepreneur on the subject of turning work into play. After running interactive games on the streets of San Francisco with groups of players who used their phones to solve clues and perform tasks, Ian turned his vision into a bonafide company and a $5 million business. The Go Game was the first locationbased game of its kind. Over the past 15 years, the game has evolved to be a leading provider in corporate team building, running over 100 events a month around the globe, with clients like Facebook, Google and Genentech. Before founding the Go Game, Ian—who hails from New York City—attended the University of Colorado at Boulder and led groups of incarcerated youth on month-long expeditions in the wilderness of Florida with Outward Bound, as well as working with Juma Ventures. Ian is a Berkeley resident and father of three. Jami Zakem, Board Member: As founder of Zakem Coaching + Consulting, Jami has a long track record of mentoring individuals and teams to reach their highest potential. With a talent for identifying people’s strengths, Jami is passionate about bringing out the best in people by tapping into their core skills and innate abilities. Over the course of her professional career, she has been able to apply her skills to a range of organizations, from Bay

Area nonprofits to corporations. She began as youth program coordinator at The Volunteer Center of SF and then as the first employee at Juma Ventures, a local nonprofit serving at-risk youth. At Juma Ventures Jami was instrumental in building and scaling their first portfolio of social enterprise operations – Ben & Jerry’s scoop shops and ice cream catering – as well as launching the HR function and youth training & support services. In 2000 Jami moved to the for-profit sector holding leadership roles in sales, account management, and customer support. She built the account management department at AngelPoints where her team supported Fortune 500 companies’ community involvement and volunteer programs. In 2008 Jami joined Yelp where she led customer support retaining more than $500M in revenue and most recently she was VP of Customer Support and Customer Success at Eventbrite. Jami currently lives in Mill Valley, CA with her husband and two children. C-3

If applicant is a tax-exempt organization, a copy of the letter issued by the Internal Revenue Service confirming the organization’s tax-exempt status. Attached

C-4

If Applicant is a corporation, Articles of Incorporation/Certificate of Incorporation certified by Applicant’s jurisdiction of organization within ninety days of application. Articles of Incorporation attached as part of question C-1.

C-5

Good standing certificates issued by applicant’s jurisdiction or organization and jurisdiction where MI project is located, if different, within ninety days of application. Not sure how to properly respond to this question. Our jurisdiction is the City of Richmond. When we contacted them, we were told that they do not issue "good standing certificates." Help!

D. Financial Projections: Submit detailed financial projections that extend, at a minimum, for the proposed time period of the MI, and that document the proposed sources and uses of funding, and how the MI will be repaid. In the case of real estate and/or facilities projects, these projections can be at the project level only if all of the proposed repayment sources are project-specific, but need to include organizational projections (with the real estate project as one component) if some of the MI repayment will come from operating revenues and sources of the borrower. Attached

Depending upon the nature of the proposal and the MI request, applicant may be required to provide additional information during the MI review process. In addition, Foundation staff may contact applicant and/or third parties involved in the Project to discuss the status and structure of the proposed loan or investment. The decision to approve and fund an MI is solely within the discretion of the Foundation’s Board of Trustees. The Foundation’s acceptance of a completed MI application does not constitute a promise or commitment to move forward with the MI requested in such application. We understand! Thanks again for considering our request. Toody Maher Executive Director POGO PARK

Statewide Park Development Community Revitalization Program California Department of Parks and Recreation

GRANT APPLICATION City of Richmond August 2019

HARBOUR-8 PARK EXPANSION PROJECT

City of Richmond

450 Civic Center Plaza Richmond, CA 94804

Harbour-8 Expansion Project

TABLE OF CONTENTS Application Form Project Selection Criteria Community FactFinder Report and Handbook Form Resolution Grant Scope/Cost Estimate Form Funding Sources Form Project Timeline Form Applicant Capacity CEQA Form Project Site Ownership, Acquisition, or Lease Concept Level Site Plan Photos and Copyright License Agreement Project Location Map Non-Profit Applicant (N/A) Conservation Corps Consultation Review

PROJECT SELECTION CRITERIA Applicant Agency/Organization Name: City of Richmond Project Name: HARBOUR-8 PARK EXPANSION PROJECT 1. Project Selection Criterion #1 - Critical Lack of Park Space Ratio of park acreage per 1,000 residents according to the FactFinder report

FactFinder Report ID Number

1.66

7949

2. Project Selection Criterion #2 - Significant Poverty A. Median Household Income according to the FactFinder report

FactFinder Report ID Number

$37,873

7949

B. Number of People Living in Poverty according to the Factfinder report

FactFinder Report ID Number

2,235

7949

3. Project Selection Criterion #3 - Type of Project

Expand an existing park. Describe how the Project site qualifies as an expansion of an existing park: A) What was the use of the expansion property prior to the current round’s application due date?

Currently, the proposed expansion property – 10,700 square feet of land that lies adjacent to Harbour-8 Park – is comprised of one small office building and empty industrial land. The Conservation Fund (TCF), this nation’s top environmental nonprofit organization, owns this property. For the past 3.5 years, TCF worked in close partnership with Pogo Park, one of the City’s leading community partners, to develop a long-range, visionary plan for how this vacant parcel of land could be integrated with Harbour-8 Park to achieve the following four goals: 1) To create new and expanded recreational opportunities on the portion of the parcel to be acquired by the City pursuant to this grant request for thousands of residents living in one of California’s toughest, and most critically underserved neighborhoods, Richmond’s one-square mile “Iron Triangle.” 2) To secure and develop the land in a way that provides multiple health benefits and real economic opportunity for community residents. 3) To own the adjacent portion of this parcel (and perhaps surrounding parcels near the park, when appropriate) as a hedge against the fast emerging and real threat of displacement. (For a summary of how this Project supports anti-displacement strategies outlined see Question 9B.) 4) Use the Harbour-8 Expansion Project as a key organizing project that brings multiple partners together (City of Richmond, Pogo Park, The Conservation Fund, health foundations, policymakers, community residents, local businesses). By working cooperatively together, by sharing resources, knowledge, and expertise, the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project become as a force multiplier and can make a real impact in the health and well-being of residents living in one of California’s most underserved communities. Today, the proposed expansion property is leased from the Conservation Fund and used by Pogo Park and its dedicated Community Resident Team. Pogo Park uses the land as a staging ground and central office space from which to continue making community-

designed and community-driven improvements to transform Harbour-8 Park into a safe, green, beautiful, and vibrant public space that serves the recreational, social, cultural, environmental, and educational needs of the community. Why is the expansion property currently not considered part of the existing adjacent park boundary?

The proposed expansion property is located on private, not public land, and is not part of the existing Harbour-8 Park boundary. B) Describe why the expansion is needed to complement the adjacent existing park.

The expansion is needed to complement the adjacent park for the following reasons. G '; $>;B501 >5@5/-8 $->7 //1?? @; '4;A?-:0? of Low-Income Residents: The expansion will create direct public access to Harbour-8 Park and the Richmond Greenway at 9th Street and Ohio Avenue. Ninth Street is a critical, much-traveled street for community residents. Ninth Street connects residents to the following key destination points: Harbour-8 Park, the Richmond Greenway (which, in turn, provides connection to Richmond’s Regional Transit Center – BART and AC Transit), Leadership and Samuel P. Greenwood Academy High Schools, Richmond’s downtown “Main Street” shopping area, and Richmond’s Kaiser Hospital. Currently, residents walking north on 9th Street are blocked at Ohio from directly accessing the key destinations listed above. To reach Harbour-8 Park from 9th Street, residents must walk east or west on Ohio Avenue (one of the busiest, most dangerous, and most unfriendly streets for walking and biking in Richmond) and turn north on either 8th Street or Harbour Way (another of Richmond’s busiest and most dangerous streets). Creating a safe, public access at 9th and Ohio directly to Harbour-8 Park provides thousands of underserved residents with a beautiful and inviting public access point to Harbour-8 Park and, in turn, to key points in the Iron Triangle neighborhood and beyond. G '; >1-@1 -: Urgently Needed Community Center: The expansion will provide the land to construct an urgently-needed Community Center. Currently, there is no community center (or official park office), anywhere along the 3-mile Richmond Greenway. Harbour-8 Park’s Community Center will create a public building that can transform into a veritable community hub: a public place for thousands of underserved residents to participate in recreational activities, take classes, hold school and community meetings, connect with city staff to discuss issues, access job and training opportunities, and attend fairs and

events. The Harbour-8 Park Community Center will become, in the words of one local resident, “the heartbeat of the community.” The City has seen, first-hand, how important and impactful a Community Center can be when located in or adjacent to a vibrant city park. In 2010, the City and Pogo Park worked together to submit a successful Prop 84 grant to expand and renovate Elm Playlot, a small 0.5 acre park and playground in the heart of the Iron Triangle neighborhood. Funding via the Prop 84 grant supported the City’s efforts to design and build a 750 foot Community Center at Elm Playlot. Today, that small Community Center is one of the City’s most used and most successful public buildings. Pogo Park operates and manages Elm Playlot’s Community Center – and uses it as a space to distribute thousands of meals to school-age children annually, hold community meetings, provide classes, and provide a warm, indoor space for residents when it is cold and rainy outside. It should be noted that during the extensive community engagement efforts for Harbour-8 Park Expansion (led by Pogo Park), residents identified Harbour-8 Park’s Community Center (modeled after the Community Center at Elm Playlot) as one of the #1 community requests. G '; D<-:0 %1/>1-@5;:-8 #<<;>@A:5@51? Increasing the size and shape of Harbour-8 Park’s footprint will provide additional recreational opportunities for residents. Today, Harbour-8 Park is a narrow, linear park – only 100 feet wide – which limits the range of recreational features and amenities that can be provided to the community. Expanding Harbour-8’s footprint to include a portion of the private property owned by The Conservation Fund adjacent to Harbour-8 Park will double the width of Harbour-8 Park’s from 100 ft. to 200 ft. – and allow the installation of an expanded number of recreational features and park amenities. G '; >1-@1 -: #A@0;;> 8-??>;;9 @; &1>B1 &/4;;8-Aged Children: Expanding Harbour-8 Park to include additional recreational features and amenities will better serve the 2,500 school-aged children who attend five schools (three elementary schools and two high schools) that are located within two short blocks of Harbour-8 Park. The City and Pogo Park are actively working with the five schools that surround Harbour-8 Park to ensure that Harbour-8 Park can serve thousands of school-age children during school hours throughout the school year. 4. Project Selection Criterion #4 - Community Based Planning A. How many meetings occurred in the critically underserved community? Describe why the meeting locations and times were convenient for residents with various employment and family schedules and who lack private transportation. If meetings occurred before June 5, 2018 (passage

of Prop 68 Bond Act), they may also be listed for historical reference. Use the chart format below to list the details of each meeting that occurred in the critically underserved community. B. For each meeting listed in the response to 4(A), what method(s) did the applicant or partnering community based organization(s) use to invite residents? In the combined set of meetings, was there a broad representation of residents? Structure the response using the chart format below to describe the method of invitation. Include the number and general description of the residents who participated in each meeting. List meetings in the order of the response to 4(A). SEE ATTACHED CHART FOR 4A AND 4B

During the meetings that occurred in the critically underserved community, how were the residents enabled to design the park using Goals 1-3.

Goal 1 Selection of the recreation feature(s) Process: (describe how the residents were enabled to identify, prioritize, and then select, recreation feature(S) for the proposed project. The goal is to ask RESIDENTS what facilities they want in the park.)

The City’s community-based nonprofit partner, Pogo Park, planned, organized, and led the efforts to: 1) engage resident children, youth, adults, and seniors to select, design, and locate the recreational features at Harbour-8 Park; and 2) capture, record, and include community residents’ ideas for safety and beautification at Harbour-8 Park. Before describing the process that Pogo Park used to identify, prioritize, and then select the recreation features for the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project, it is important to provide a brief summary of Pogo Park’s unique approach to community engagement. The State of California Parks & Recreation Department featured Pogo Park’s community engagement process as a best practice in the 2015 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP). For the past 12 years, Pogo Park approached the process of community engagement in a radically new way. In fact, they disrupted the process! Instead of asking residents – those who know their neighborhood best – to volunteer their time to participate in community design meetings with paid professional planners, architects, and designers (most of whom live outside of the community) to design a new park for the people, Pogo Park hired, trained, and empowered a core team of local residents to plan, design, build (and now manage) these parks themselves. The result is that Pogo Park-created parks are planned, designed, and built “by the people, for the people.” Pogo Park provided living-wage jobs to community residents to plan, organize, and direct the entire Harbour-8 Park community engagement process. Hiring a team of community residents to lead and drive the community engagement process provided multiple benefits. First, residents themselves get the best feedback! Community residents are more likely to engage with – and provide honest feedback – to other community residents they know versus providing feedback to people they do not know or recognize who live outside the community. Second, community residents can identify the optimum places,

times, and processes to use to solicit real community input. Third, by being deeply engaged in the community engagement process themselves, local residents have “skin in the game,” and provide a sense to other community members that this Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project is not another feel-good project, but “for real.” Harbour-8 Park Expansion Outreach To follow is the process that Pogo Park’s 15-member Community Outreach Team (COT), all local residents with deep ties to the Iron Triangle neighborhood, diverse in age, race, and gender, used to engage community residents to select recreation features for Harbour-8 Park: Pogo Park’s COT collected and compiled a wish list of every recreational feature requested by community residents over the past eight years for three park projects on the Greenway (Unity Park, Greening the Last Mile, and Harbour-8 Park). Note: Pogo Park led, or played a major role in the community engagement efforts for these three projects. At every community meeting to engage residents about the future vision for the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project, Pogo Park’s COT displayed this historical master wish list of community-recorded and desired recreational features for everyone to see. The master list was intended to serve only as a source of ideas and inspiration, not as a predetermined list of features. The COT emphasized to residents to “start with a blank slate,” as a starting point, to “dream big” as if “the sky’s the limit” when identifying recreation features they wanted to see at Harbour-8 Park. Pogo Park’s COT collected, recorded, and analyzed every recreational feature suggested by community residents during Harbour-8 Park’s extensive community engagement process. COT then scheduled meetings with City staff and professional experts (landscape architects, engineers, a custom fabrication studio, and a general contractor) to review the feasibility and cost of designing and building the specific recreation features identified by community residents. After meeting with City staff and professional experts, the COT met multiple times, over multiple days, to identify, prioritize, and ultimately select the recreational features desired by the larger community to include in this Harbour8 Park grant application.

Design of the recreation feature(s) Process: (describe how the residents were enabled to provide design ideas for the selected recreation feature(s). The goal is to ask residents for detailed design ideas of the features, after the features are selected.)

After residents identified and selected the desired recreation features for Harbour-8 Park, Pogo Park’s COT held multiple “Community Design Meetings,” over multiple days, at times and places convenient to the community, to ask residents to provide their own design ideas for the specific recreation features selected for Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project. (Note: The specifics of those Community Design Meetings are detailed in Question 4A and B.) At the multiple Community Design Meetings, Pogo Park’s COT used the same process to enable residents to design the park. First, the COT provided a rough, concept level, site plan showing the community-selected recreation features and their proposed location at Harbour-8 Park. Second, Pogo Park’s COT provided youth, adult, and senior residents with a large, white, blank sheet of paper, 36” wide by 24” tall, that included black boundary lines to represent the footprint of Harbour-8 Park and the proposed expansion property adjacent to Harbour-8 Park. On this 36” by 24” sheet of paper, the COT asked youth, adult, and senior residents to record their design ideas for selected recreation features in one of three ways: 1) to draw their design ideas directly on the blank sheet of paper; 2) to write down their design ideas, in their own language, on the paper; 3) to describe their design ideas to a COT member who was skilled in drawing – and that COT member would quickly sketch that resident’s ideas on-the-spot. To solicit design ideas from children, the COT provided children with a blank sheet of white paper and colored pens and pencils. The COT enabled and encouraged children to draw their ideas on paper – or to articulate their design ideas to a COT member who would either write or draw the idea on a sheet of paper.

This process to generate and record community-driven design ideas from children, youth, adults, and seniors was very effective. The process enabled residents to engage directly with other residents and build upon ideas. It enabled residents of all ages, all races, all genders, and all cultures to participate. And it provided multiple tools and multiple methods for residents to communicate their design ideas in multiple ways. List of design ideas: (list the residents’ ideas that will be included in the design of the recreation feature(S). Avoid listing ideas that will not be included.)

To follow is a list of residents’ ideas that will be included in the design of Harbour-8 Park’s recreation features. (Note: Actual phrases used by residents to identify and describe their specific design ideas for various recreational features are shown below in quotations.) COMMUNITY CENTER T .?FLC; CFFB V@:FE@:W 8E; V;@==<I<EK K?8E 8EP FK?LC8I-looking community center.” Residents want the Community Center to look like “a big, beautiful barn” that is “hand-crafted.” T V"C8JJ ;FFIJ 8IFLE; K?< 9FKKFD F= K?< FDDLE@KP Center that push open” to “let the sunlight in during the day” and that “can be closed when it’s cold to keep everyone warm,” and that “give the building an indoor/outdoor feel.” T V2@E;FNJ 8IFLE; K?< KFG F= K?< 9L@C;@E> KF C<K @E K?< C@>?K W T -8K?<I K?an designing the Community Center with multiple rooms, residents proposed building “one main recreation/meeting room” with “wood paneling and a wood floor,” and a “high, vaulted ceiling...like a church.” The main meeting/recreation room would include “beautiful lights.” Residents reasoned that having one large room is better than having multiple small rooms because one main room provides “flexible space” to accommodate multiple uses that include recreation classes, community meetings, public events, fairs, parties, movie nights etc. T VKI8EJ@K@FE JG8:<W 9<KN<<E K?< <EKIP ;FFI KF K?< FDDLE@KP <EK<I 8E; K?< main recreation room to be able to better screen people before they enter the main room. (Living in a neighborhood that suffers from some of the highest levels of gun violence in California, residents are especially wary of people

bringing weapons into the Community Center’s main room – and want a way to stop them before they do.) T VGI@M8K< G8K@FW N@K? VG8IKP C@>?KJW K?8K @J :FEE<:K<; KF K?< EFIK?-facing side of the building. When people are using the private patio, “they should be able to see their children playing in the children’s play area.” T V(8B@E> NFF; :8IM@E>JW @E J<:K@FEJ F= NFF; @E K?< FDDLE@KP <EK out” the building and “make it unique.” T V/?< FDDLE@KP <EK<I J?FLC; ?8M< 8 B@K:?<E 8E; 8 I<JKIFFDW 8E; “cubbyholes to store your coats and stuff.” T V:FDDLE@KP 9LCC<K@E 9F8I; N?<I< G<FGC< :8E GFJK @E=FID8K@FE 89FLK AF9J 8E; services.” CHILDREN’S PLAY AREA T .?FLC; 9< VKhe focus, the heart and soul” of the park; “the reason why people come here.” T VC8I>< J8E; 8E; N8K JKIL:KLI< K?8K CFFBJ C@B< 8 9@> KI<<W N@K? VGC8K=FIDJ K?8K B@;J :8E climb up and see everything.” T E VFC;-school merry-go-round spinner that goes fast!” T .FD< B@E; F= VKI8DGFC@E< =<8KLI< JF K?8K B@;J :8E ALDG W T J<K F= ;@J: JN@E>J VK?< J8D< FE<J B@E; 8J CD +C8PCFKW T VJ<8K@E> N8CC K?8K >F<J 8IFLE; K?< <EK@I< GC8P 8I<8W K?8K J<G8I8K<J K?< GC8P area from the rest of the park. T GIFK<:K<; KFK-lot inside/adjacent to the Children’s Play Area that is dedicated to the needs of babies and toddlers. RESTROOMS T "<E;@ICJ :8E LJ<W K?8K 8I< <HL@GG<; with “a toilet, sink, mirror, and trash receptacle.” T V ?8E>@E> JK8K@FEJ =FI 989@<J W T -<JKIFFDJ VK?8K :8E 9< CF:B<; 8K E@>?K W ENTRY GATEWAYS T /?< D<K8C 8I:?N8PJ 8K K?< <EKI8E:<J KF #8I9FLI-8 Park on Harbour Way and 8th Street “look like a railroad crossing” with railroad-themed lights, signs, and a train on top of the archway” that “shine the light on the role the railroads played

in Richmond’s rich history.” T V ?8E;-crafted, waist-high, brick wall” “with a cap so people can’t stand on it.” T VGC8HL< N@K? K?< E8D< F= K?< G8IB <D9<;ded in the wall.” ZIP LINE AREA T V/?< CFE><JK 8E; K8CC<JK Q@G C@E< GFJJ@9C< W T Q@G C@E< VK?8K :8E ?8E;C< 8 CFK F= N<@>?K W T V <E:?<J =FI G8I<EKJ KF J@K 8E; N8K:? K?<@I :?@C;I<E W BBQ / PICNIC AREA T V(8B< K?I<< J<G8I8K< , 8I<8J =FI G<FGC< KF 9< able to reserve for their families.” T V+LK K?< K?I<< , 8I<8J E<OK KF <8:? FK?<I 9LK =@E; 8 N8P KF J<G8I8K< <8:? area from the other so that families have their own private space.” T V+LK @E K?< J8D< KI8J?-can BBQ’s you have at Elm Playlot.” T V(8B< Jure the BBQ’s can be locked up at night.” T V+LI:?8J< DFM<89C< G@:E@: K89C<J – like the ones at Elm Playlot.” LIGHTING Along with surveillance cameras, lighting was one of residents’ most requested features. Residents say that they would use Harbour-8 Park more often if the lighting improved. T V'@>?K LG 8CC K?< ;8IB 8I<8J F= K?< G8IBW JF VG<FGC< ;FEYK ?8M< 8 :?8E:< KF hide.” T V$EJK8CC C@>?KJ K?8K 8I< ?@>? HL8C@KP 8E; 9<8LK@=LC W K?8K <D@K V8 N8ID P<CCFN glow – not that cold, white/blue color that looks like a prison light.” T V0J< 9LCC<KGIFF= >C8JJ KF D8B< JLI< G<FGC< :8EYK 9I<8B K?<D W BIKE/WALK PATH Residents report that the Richmond Greenway’s current, 3-mile long, bike/walk path is “way too straight,” “lacks curves,” “encourages speeding,” and is “like a freeway.” Residents have the following design ideas for Harbour-8 Park’s bike/walk path: T LIM< K?< :LII<EK G8K? 8K K?< ?@C;I<EYJ +C8P I<8 E<8I K? .KI<<K KF K?< EFIK? over the bioswale, to “slow down traffic” and “create more space for the play area” T ?8E>< K?< G8K?YJ JLI=8:< 8:IFJJ K?< 9@FJN8C< =IFD 8JG?8CK KF 8 NFF; N@K? 8 railing “so it feels like a wooden bridge.”

LANDSCAPING Residents requested more greenery throughout the entire Project site including: T OK<E;@E> K?< 9@FJN8C< FE Khe north side of the park “all the way to 8th Street.” T V+C8EK@E> DFI< GC8EKJ <M<IPN?<I< W T FEK@EL< KF V>IFN KI<<J KF GIFM@;< J?8;< W SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS Asked for ideas for how to make Harbour-8 Park safe, residents’ #1 solution was staffing. Their #2 solution was surveillance cameras distributed throughout the park “to record everything that’s going on in HD.” PUBLIC ART T $EJK8CC GL9C@: 8IK K?IFL>?FLK K?< G8IB K?8K VC@=KJ LG W V:<C<9I8K<J W 8E; V?@>?C@>?KJW Richmond’s “rich history” and “different cultures.” T $EJK8CC 8 JK8KL< D8IBE@Q<J '@CC@< (8< %FE<J W 8 CFE>term community resident, now deceased, who envisioned the Richmond Greenway decades ago and then spent 15 years spearheading the effort to transform the former BNSF rail line into a linear park that runs through the central core neighborhoods in Richmond. Goal 2 Location of the recreation feature(s) within the park. Process: (describe the process that enabled the residents to express their preferences for the location of the recreation feature(s) within the park.)

After leading the community engagement process to identify and select Harbour8 Park’s new recreation features, Pogo Park’s COT spearheaded the following process to enable residents to express their preference for the location of Harbour-8 Park’s new recreation features: First, Pogo Park’s COT provided residents with a 36” x 24” white sheet of paper with black lines to reflect the new expanded boundaries of the park. The COT asked residents to draw directly on the paper to note exactly where they wanted to locate new recreation features. Second, Pogo Park’s COT built, by hand, a ¼” scale model of Harbour-8 Park. This 10 foot long model of Harbour-8 Park included both a model of the existing features that would remain (i.e. 23 trees, the bike/walk path, benches, lights, Mini Play Field etc.), and scale model pieces of the various recreation features identified and selected by the community (i.e. a Community Center, a Children’s

Play Area, Restrooms, Entry Gateways, a Zip Line, BBQ/Picnic Area, Lighting, Patio Area, and Surveillance Cameras). As a tool to enable residents to express their preference for the location of specific recreation features, the COT encouraged residents to pick up, move, and place the scale models of these specific recreation features anywhere they wanted on the 10 foot model of Harbour-8 Park. List of Reasons: (list the reasons that will be used for the location of the recreation feature(s) within the park. Avoid listing reasons that will not be used.)

To follow are the details of the reasons why residents wanted to locate specific recreation features in specific locations within the park: COMMUNITY CENTER: Residents wanted to locate the Community Center next to the new entrance to Harbour-8 Park at 9th Street and Ohio Avenue to provide a “visual anchor” and a “gateway” into the entire park site. Additionally, residents reasoned that staff at the Community Center at the entrance could watch over “who is coming in and who is going out” of the park site. CHILDREN’S PLAY AREA: Residents wanted the Children’s Play Area located at the center of the park “to keep children away from the busy traffic on Ohio Avenue” and to make the children’s playground “the centerpiece of the entire park...the reason people will come.” RESTROOMS: Residents wanted to locate the restrooms next to the Greenway bike/walk path and next to the Children’s Play Area because that would be the most “accessible place for people to use the restrooms.” Additionally, placing the restroom next to the path and the children’s play area would “provide the most visible place for everyone to watch what was going on in the bathrooms.” ENTRY GATEWAYS: Residents wanted to locate Entry Gateways at three entrances to Harbour-8 Park: on Harbour Way, 8th Street, and 9th Street to “mark the entryway” to the park and make the entry gateways to the park “special and unique.” (Note: Residents remarked repeatedly that they loved – and were inspired by – the hand-carved, 14-foot totem pole that Pogo Park’s Community Team previously built, by hand, and installed at the entryway to Harbour-8 Park on 9th Street and the Greenway.)

ZIP LINE AREA: Residents wanted to install the longest zip line possible; the only logical place to locate it is next to the existing fence on the south side of the park, near the entrance on 8th Street. Additionally, residents want to install a small zip line for toddlers that would be located next to the small tot-lot inside the children’s play area. BBQ/PICNIC AREA: Residents wanted to create a private BBQ/Picnic Area next to the Greenway path, “away from the action” where people could have their own privacy while also being able to “see the action from where they are.” BIKE/WALK PATH: Residents wanted to move the current location of Harbour-8’s bike/walk path in the middle of the path to the north in order to “slow down speeding bikes” and “provide more space for the children’s playground.” LIGHTING / SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS: Residents want lighting and cameras to both “light up the entire park” and “record everything happening in HD” as a tool to discourage criminal activity. Goal 3 Safety and park beautification Process: (describe the process that enabled the residents to provide park design ideas for safe public use and park beautification.)

Pogo Park’s COT asked hundreds of residents who participated in multiple Community Design Meetings over multiple days to provide design ideas to make Harbour-8 Park both safe for public use and beautiful. To follow is a description of the process used: The COT encouraged residents to write down their design ideas on the same 36” x 24” white sheet of paper used to record residents’ ideas for new recreation features, the design of those features, and the location of those features. For residents who were disinclined to write their ideas down on paper, the COT asked residents to articulate their ideas, and the COT recorded those ideas either on the residents’ 36” x 24” sheet of paper or on a separate sheet of paper the COT team used to capture all input. The COT compiled all design ideas on a large whiteboard and then recorded the ideas on a spreadsheet.

List of safe public use ideas: (list the residents’ ideas that will be included in the proposed project. Avoid listing ideas that will not be included.)

The following list reflects residents’ ideas for safe public use that will be included in the Harbour-8 Park project. Surveillance Cameras that “are visible so people know they are around” and to capture and record activities happening in every inch of Harbour-8 Park, day and night. Lighting that illuminates every section of Harbour-8 Park at night. During the Community Design Meetings, another theme emerged for public safety: to hire a security team to have a presence at Harbour-8 24/7, and that is comprised of community residents, not police. List of park beautification ideas: (list the residents’ ideas that will be included in the proposed project. Avoid listing ideas that will not be included.)

The following list reflects residents’ ideas for park beautification that will be included in the Harbour-8 Park project. Public Art that is created by people from the community, is uplifting, and that “shines the light” on special people from the community. Specific ideas include: a sculpture/mural of Lillie Mae Jones, legendary community activist and visionary of the Richmond Greenway; artistic archways at three entrances to Harbour-8 Park that reflect Richmond’s history. Landscaping to provide residents with plants, trees, and shrubs that attract birds, butterflies, and bees and transform Harbour-8 Park from a former railroad line into a beautiful and vibrant public green space.

$>;61/@ &181/@5;: >5@1>5;: - Employment or Volunteer Opportunities Describe how the project will include employment or volunteer outdoor learning opportunities for residents including youth and/or corps members by answering A and B using the following chart format:

A. Brief Description of what types of Meaningful Employment or Volunteer outdoor learning opportunities for residents and/or corps members between June 5, 2018 until project completion.

SUMMARY: Over the past 12 years, the City of Richmond has worked closely with our community partner, Pogo Park, to explore innovative ways for the City to direct monies for capital improvement projects down, into the community, to provide meaningful employment, training, and volunteer opportunities for community residents. The mechanism we use today is to award a “sole source” contract to Pogo Park to lead, direct, and manage the entire process of designing and building a new park. In turn, Pogo Park uses funds from the City’s sole source contracts to hire, train, and empower community residents to perform a significant portion of the work themselves. More importantly, they are able to leverage the City’s sole source contracts to secure foundation grants to support their efforts in workforce development. Recently, Pogo Park secured a highly-competitive $1 million grant from Chevron Corporation to develop its organizational capacity to expand its workforce development program. Since working together in 2010 on our first project (the Prop 84funded Elm Playlot Expansion and Renovation Project), Pogo Park used and leveraged the City’s contract to: create 172 living wage jobs for community residents; provide 17,000 hours in workforce development training, pump $1.75 million in wages into the pockets of local people; and help residents build skills, resumes, and career pathways. This unusual and highly impactful approach to use capital projects as a vehicle to provide meaningful employment and training opportunities to local people is working – and, if funded, is the same approach we plan to use for the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project will have exponentially more impact.

B. How many residents and/or Corps members

We estimate that the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project has or will provide the following employment and volunteer learning opportunities for residents and/or corps members:

Task

Number Employed

Outreach to residents during community based planning

Creating a life-sized and ¼” scale model of Harbour-8 Park

Meeting with design professionals and city staff to finalize the scope and budget for Harbour-8 Park

Working with design professionals to finalize the concept level plan for Harbour-8 Park

Working with design professionals, general contractor, and Master Builders to design and build virtually all the recreation features at Harbour-8 Park

Landscaping (clearing debris, planting shrubs, bushes and native plants)

Creating public art for Harbour-8 Park

Designing, building, and installing park amenities and signage

TOTAL

C. Outcome of the Corps Consultation Process: Using the following chart format: Cite the outcome of the Corps Consultation Review Process (Checklist Item #15). Is it feasible for the Corps to work on a project component? Yes

⊠

If yes, list the binding/agreed upon services to be performed by the Corps.

If yes, list cost of work for each service

Landscaping: clearing debris, planting shrubs, bushes and drought-tolerant native plants.

$10,000

Installing Amenities: installing custom-made park amenities (e.g. benches, shade structure, public art etc.)

$5,000

Installing Signage: installing custom-made education, informational, and wayfinding signs.

$5,000

If Corps offered services, but applicant declined, provide the reason for not using their services

Project Selection Criterion #6 – Partnerships or Committed Funding Describe partnership assistance given to the applicant beginning with the passage of the Bond Act (June 5, 2018) through project completion, by completing the chart below. If no partners are involved in the project, but the applicant has committed funds, write “See Funding Sources Form” in boxes A and B below.

In all our projects, including the Harbour-8 Expansion Project, the City is guided by the City’s landmark Health in All Policies Plan (HiAP), the first of its kind in all cities in California. HiAP mandates that, when city staff engage in public work projects, they do so through the lens of community health and equity. The City views the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project as a key project that actualizes the fundamental tenets of the City’s HiAP.

Additionally the Project leverages over a decade of work with our community partner, Pogo Park, and a well-oiled community-led design process. The Harbour-8 Expansion Project brings together collaborative efforts from the following partner organizations: A. Name and General Purpose of Organization (specify if it is a health organization)

B. Partnership Role specific to this project such as assisting with community based planning, contributing volunteer hours or materials, or funding support

Pogo Park, a community nonprofit based in Richmond’s Iron Triangle neighborhood that transforms blighted and littleused city parks into safe, green, and beautiful public spaces. Pogo Park uses vibrant city parks as vehicles for community health and wellness.

Pogo Park is a community-based nonprofit organization that has partnered with the city of Richmond for 12 years. The Harbour-8 Expansion Project leverages a partnership which includes over a decade of community work and a well-oiled community-led design process by Pogo Park. The City views Pogo Park as the main organizer of the Project and the primary driver in the communityled design process. As such, Pogo Park will lead the community-based arm of the Project, including community outreach, visioning meetings with local residents and resident led-design process. As a primary partner, Pogo Park drives the efforts to integrate and incorporate the best thought-leadership community led design-practices, research, and funding models into the Project. Pogo Park will bring together the most forward thinking public health organizations and community leaders around the state.

University of California Berkeley, School of Public Health, health organization

The City has worked with UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health for the last 10 years to implement an innovative and pioneering Health in all Policies (HiAP) ordinance and strategy. The HiAP ordinance mandates that when City staff create public work projects in Richmond, they do so through the lens of

community health and equity. UC Berkeley’s role on the Project is to provide detailed health statistics and relevant data about residents of the Iron Triangle living around and near the Project site to promote health equity. The California Endowment, a foundation and health organization

The California Endowment (TCE) directly funded the City of Richmond to implement their Health in All Policies plan city wide. Additionally, TCE is providing funding directly to Pogo Park in support of conducting the community-based planning for this grant.

Kaiser Permanente, a health organization

Kaiser Permanente is helping us to envision how to best connect Kaiser Permanente hospital to Harbour8 Park via the Yellow Road Project. To accomplish this goal, Kaiser provided staff hours with Kaiser executives who have extensive experience on capital improvement projects. These executives are helping us to envision how to create a public space that benefits the residents of the Iron Triangle. Kaiser is also directly funding Pogo Park’s model for how to use parks to improve community health.

Contra Costa Health Services Department, a health organization

Contra Costa Health Services Department has been working on Safe Routes to Schools and Safe Routes to Transit and Safe Routes to Parks with the City of Richmond and Pogo Park to create safe multi-modal transit through Richmond.

The Conservation Fund

The Conservation Fund is a national nonprofit dedicated to preserving land for the public good. The Conservation Fund acquired 17,500 square feet of privately owned land adjacent to Harbour-8 Park. The Conservation Fund landbanked this parcel of land with the explicit goal to support the city of Richmond and Pogo Park’s vision to: 1) expand the footprint of the park to provide additional recreational opportunities for the community. and 2) hedge against displacement. By placing the land around the park into a land trust, the intention is to capture a portion of rising property values and reinvest those values into long-term programs that serve the community and hedge against displacement.

Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council

Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council has provided over 100 volunteer hours conducting community outreach with local residents to determine and identify what improvements the community wants to see implemented at Harbour-8 Park. The Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council utilizes a network of local volunteers to spread the word to the local community, and to solicit input from a wide variety of community stakeholders.

Scientific Art Studio

Scientific Art Studio (SAS) is a world-renowned custom fabrication shop. It is famous in the Bay Area for building the iconic mitt at the Giants ballpark. To date, SAS designed and built thrilling children’s play environments for clients such as the San Francisco Zoo, Oakland Zoo, and the Bay Area Discovery Museum. In the past 12 years SAS has become active in the City of Richmond to assist the City and Pogo Park in their efforts to transform and rebuild parks. For The Harbour-8 Expansion Project SAS is providing assistance with design, including a concept drawing, and working alongside landscape architects to produce the site plan.

Vallier Design Associates

Vallier Design Associates (VDA) is a woman-owned licensed landscape architect business in Richmond, CA. VDA has provided detailed Project plans pro bono for over 25 years to help guide the City’s vision for expanding our parks and to assist with the task of putting together grants.

MIG

MIG is an award-winning urban planning firm renowned for their forward-thinking innovative design work. MIG intentionally plans and designs environments that support healthy human development. MIG worked in partnership with the City of Richmond and Pogo Park to produce the design for Elm Playlot, considered to be one of the most successful Prop 84 projects in California. For this Project, MIG is providing design expertise and volunteer hours to the city of Richmond and Pogo Park to help envision how the Yellow Brick Road Project will connect Elm Playlot to Harbour-8 Park.

mack5

Mack 5 is a project, cost and construction management firm. They are working pro-bono to put together a comprehensive cost estimate for the Harbour-8 Expansion Project.

CSW/ST2

CSW/ST2 is a civil engineering firm providing pro bono civil engineering advice pertaining to the concept for the site plan for the Project.

Vetter Landscapes Inc.

Vetter Landscapes is a licensed landscape contractor with a long established relationship working with Pogo Park. Vetter Landscapes is providing both materials and pro bono labor hours to support the planning of the concept for the site for the Harbour-8 Expansion Project.

7. Project Selection Criterion #7 - Environmental Design Describe in the chart below how the project will provide efficient use of water and other natural resources by answering both (A) and (B) combined For the application to be eligible, the project must include, at a minimum 1 of the following 4 techniques. Four points will be given to projects that use all four. 1. Incorporate pervious surfaces or other technique(s) such as bio-swales or grading to capture stormwater for infiltration or irrigation, or cleanse storm water before release. 2. Use of water efficient irrigation system that includes a rain sensor, evapotranspiration (ET) controllers, flow sensors, or on-site water recycling that reduces potable water consumption, or the project will not require additional use of water. 3. At least 10% of the materials for project construction will consist of recycled materials, or construction waste will be minimized by the separation and recycling of recoverable materials generated during construction. 4. Landscaping that excludes the use of invasive plants and instead features drought tolerant or climate appropriate non-invasive native turf, trees, shrubs, plants, and ground cover. Also discuss how the landscaping minimizes the use of toxic pesticides and inorganic fertilizers. Use the following chart format to list and describe each sustainable technique in response to (A) above.

A. How will the project include the following sustainable techniques? A. Sustainable Technique

Description of the sustainable technique

1. Incorporate Pervious Surfaces

The Project will incorporate pervious surfaces by installing pervious pavers and bioswales to capture, and slow stormwater flows and allow it to infiltrate into the soil. Paving surfaces will be graded to drain into planting to capture runoff. Planting areas will be mulched to absorb rainfall and retain soil moisture.

2. Water Efficient Irrigation

The Project will follow the recommendations in MWELO (Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance) and will utilize a water efficient irrigation system that will be set to deliver the minimum amount of water needed to keep the project plantings healthy. The project will utilize WUCOLS (Water Use Classification of Landscape Species) to select low water use species and plants will be organized into hydrozones to ensure the lowest irrigation rates feasible. The irrigation system will include a rain sensor to prevent water delivery during storms.

3. 10% of materials will consist of recycled materials or construction waste will be minimized

At least 10% of the project materials will be specified as recycled materials, such as composite lumber for edging, arbor mulch and other construction materials as feasible. The Project will minimize construction waste by setting up a system to separate and recycle recoverable materials generated during construction.

4. Landscaping Excludes Invasive Plants | Features Drought Tolerant or Climate Appropriate Plants.

The Project will plant a mix of California native and non-native drought tolerant, climate appropriate turf, trees, shrubs, and ground covers that excludes plant species designated as invasive by the Cal-IPC (California Invasive Plant Council). The Project maintenance plan will include practices such as Integrated Pest

Management rather than the use of toxic pesticides. Biological soil analysis and organic solid amendments and fertilizers approved by OMRI (Organic Materials Review Institute) such as compost, compost tea and biological inoculates will be used to balance soil biology to eliminate inorganic fertilizers. B. How will the project include the following additional techniques that are not listed in question (A) above? 1. Carbon sequestration tree planting (identify approximately how many trees will be planted). See Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction and Carbon Sequestration technical assistance on page 65. If the project will not include tree planting, include one other energy, water, and natural resource conservation technique. 2. Facilitation of safe and reliable drinking water to park visitors if not yet available. If safe and reliable drinking water is already available for park visitors, include one other energy, water, and natural resource conservation technique. 3. One other energy, water, and/or natural resource conservation technique. Use the following chart format to list and describe each sustainable technique for B. List 3 techniques for maximum points.

B. Sustainable Technique

Description of the sustainable technique

1. Create recreation features using locally sourced materials to reduce environmental impacts from global transportation.

Recreation features will be made by hand, and raw materials will be locally sourced in Richmond to reduce environmental impacts from domestic and global transportation.

2. Wildlife habitat

The Project will install areas of native plantings selected specifically to provide wildlife habitat (food, water and shelter), for local bird and insect species, as well as for migratory bird species that travel the Pacific Flyway and stop over in the Bay Area.

3. Energy-efficient systems in building

The Community Center building will be oriented to take advantage of the location of the sun throughout the day to minimize the energy expended for heating and cooling the structure. The Community Center will include energyefficient lighting that activates only in low light. Lighting will use LED fixtures that minimize electrical usage. The building will also utilize lowflow toilets.

8. Project Selection Criterion #8 – Public Use Fees and Hours of Operation Describe how youth, seniors, and families affected by poverty will have daily access to the project site by answering the following: A. Overall park Monday through Sunday hours of operation: What will be the Monday through Sunday hours of operation for the overall park to accommodate various needs of youth, seniors, and families?

To accommodate the needs of children, youth, seniors, and families, Harbour-8 Park will be open to the public seven days a week from dawn to dusk, at least eight hours per day.

Sunday

Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

Saturday

Dawn to dusk*

Dawn to dusk

*Due to seasonal daylight fluctuations, Harbour-8 Park will be open at least eight hours per day during the winter and at least 12 hours per day in the summer. B. Specific hours of operation of grant-funded facilities: Will the Monday through Sunday hours of operation differ for any recreation features listed in the Grant Scope/Cost Estimate Form? If so, please identify the recreation feature(s) and Monday through Sunday hours of operation in the chart below.

Recreation Feature

Sun

Mon

Tues

Wed

Thurs

Fri

Sat

Community Center

Closed

9am to 5pm

12pm to 5pm

C. Entrance or membership fees [no chart]: 1.

Overall park:

Will the public be charged entrance or membership fees to enter the overall park?

The public will not be charged entrance or membership fees to enter Harbour-8 Park. 2.

Fees for a specific grant-funded recreation feature:

Will entrance, membership, or league/activity fees be charged to use a recreation feature that is a majority of the total project cost listed in the grant scope/Cost Estimate Form?

The public will not be charged entrance, membership, or league/activity fees to use any recreational features listed in the GrantScope/Cost Estimate Form for Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project. If so, list each fee, identify if the fee is daily, weekly, or monthly, and explain why the fee will not prevent daily access for youth, seniors, and families affected by poverty.

N/A 9. Project Selection Criterion #9 – Community Challenges, PROJECT Benefits, and Readiness A. What challenges are present within the community that contributes to the need for the project?

Challenge

Description of the Challenge

Physical Barriers

CHALLENGE: The Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project is located in Richmond’s one square mile “Iron Triangle” neighborhood. The 2 census tracts that make up Richmond’s Iron Triangle (3760 & 3770) are among the most unhealthy, and severely disadvantaged, of all 8,000 census tracts in California.

Physical Barriers...cont.

The Iron Triangle gets its name from the three railroad tracks that define its borders. The railroad tracks act as a formidable physical barrier that has prevented residents, for decades, from easily crossing into another neighborhood. Many Iron Triangle residents feel trapped in their own neighborhood – especially the youth and elderly, who do not drive. Moreover, the railroad lines represent specific borders for gang territory. It is common for Iron Triangle residents (who live in “Central” Richmond) to report that they have not ventured five minutes away into North Richmond, a rival gang territory, in 25 years. Also, the Iron Triangle’s southern border, the former BNSF railroad line, was transformed 12 years ago into the Richmond Greenway. The Greenway, to this day, marks the actual dividing line that separates rival gang territory in “Central” and “South” Richmond. Research shows that being isolated and cut off from other communities negatively impacts health. HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO THE NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK EXPANSION PROJECT: T I<8K<J 8 M@9Iant city park where residents from South and Central Richmond can come together, play together, gather together in a neutral public space and begin to bind the wounds and heal the scars caused by decades of gun violence and trauma. T +IFM@;<J 8 :I@K@:8C access point that enables residents to connect to a network of multimodal transportation routes including: BART and Amtrak the primary regional Bus Transit Hub served by Alameda-Contract Costa Transit District. The Richmond BART/Amtrak Transportation Hub connects to multiple transit operators, including

Physical Barriers...cont.

Golden Gate Transit, WestCAT, SolTrans, and provides direct access down Harbour Way to catch the Richmond-San Francisco ferry. The Project also provides access to the Richmond Greenway, a 3mile long walk-bike path that connects to the San Francisco Bay Trail, and Ohlone Greenway. PROJECT READINESS: The City of Richmond and Pogo Park worked together, in a rare, close, and successful 12-year partnership, to reimagine, rebuild, and transform little-used city parks in Iron Triangle into safe, green, and beautiful public spaces. The City and Pogo Park are ready to build on 12 years of collaborative efforts to make Harbour-8 a project that will significantly impact the health and well-being of thousands of California’s most underserved residents living in one of California’s most underserved neighborhoods. To follow are five reasons why the City and Pogo Park are extraordinarily prepared to complete this important Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project on time: T The City and Pogo Park developed and built what is now a well-oiled system to ensure that dollars from capital projects are directed down, into the community, to “lift up the people” at the same time we “lift up the place.” T +F>F +8IB 9L@CK 8E <OKI8FI;inary team of local residents who are deeply engaged, deeply involved, and who contribute a strong and proven community voice in every aspect of park development – from initial planning, to design, permitting, building, and finally to actually operating and providing programming once the park is built.

Physical Barriers...cont.

In fact, the State Parks Department, policymakers, health foundation, other parks organizations have singled-out Pogo Park’s “bottoms-up,” “built from the inside/out” approach to community engagement as the gold standard of what real, authentic community engagement looks like. T The City and Pogo Park built a core team of proven, capable, and dedicated partners who are in place and ready to go. Those partners are detailed in Question #6 (above). One core partner stands out: Iron Triangle business, Scientific Art Studio (SAS), a custom fabrication studio renowned for building the iconic giant mit at the SF Giants ballpark. SAS also designed and built new play areas at the SF Zoo, Oakland Zoo, and Bay Area Discovery Museum. SAS created a dedicated studio within their studio for Pogo Park’s team of community residents to design and build unique recreation features for Elm Playlot, for Harbour-8’s Pop Up Park, and for the Harbour-8 Improvement project. Pogo Park and SAS employ a Master Builder / Apprentice model. An Apprentice (Pogo Park’s team of community residents) joins with a Master Builder (skilled, professional, and expert artisans at SAS) to design and build custom recreation features. By actually using a “hands-on” approach to design and actually build something real, residents acquire transferable workplace skills in woodwork, metalwork, sculpting, painting, drafting etc. that can provide them with a career pathway. T J FLKC@E<; @E FLI "<E<I8C +Can, the City’s policies are aligned with Pogo Park’s work in Iron Triangle. In fact, Pogo Park’s work is actualizing our City’s policies, especially with respect to health. We are excited for this to continue.

Physical Barriers...cont. High Levels of Gun Violence

T Experience. The City and Pogo Park have worked together for 12 years on multiple projects. This Project will benefit from decade-long partnership. CHALLENGE: Only a few years ago, Iron Triangle was ranked the 7th most violent neighborhood in America. Every resident has either lost a family member to gun violence or knows someone from the community who has been impacted. The result is that residents, especially youth, are in a constant state of high state alert, always looking over their shoulder, and afraid to be outside in public places. HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK: T +IFM@;<J 8 J8=< GL9C@: JG8:< N?<I< K?< :FDDLE@KP can gather and children can play without fear from gun violence. PROJECT READINESS: The City and Pogo Park have collaborated with virtually every organization in Richmond dedicated to reducing gun violence (Richmond Police Department, Office of Neighborhood Safety, Re-entry Solutions Group, The RYSE Youth Center and Contra Costa Schools) to use city parks as vehicles to reduce gun violence in our community.

Toxic, Polluted Environment

CHALLENGE: Because the Iron Triangle neighborhood is adjacent to four of the Bay Area’s worst emitters of toxic air pollution (Chevron Refinery, BNSF Railway, Richmond Parkway, and Port of Richmond) residents suffer from devastating health effects caused by extreme environmental pollution. Those health effects are detailed below in our section on Poor Health Outcomes. The Iron Triangle’s two census tracts rank in the top 10% of the most environmentally polluted of all 8,000 census tracts in California.

Toxic, Polluted Environment ...continue

For decades, residents are forced to suffer from the impacts of toxic pollution coming from local industry that enjoys weak environmental oversight. Iron Triangle’s toxic pollution comes in all forms: 1) Polluted Air. The levels of particulate matter recorded in the air rank in the top 5% for the worst emission scores among census tracts in California. Air in Iron Triangle is dense with particulate emissions from heavy traffic from the thousands of cars traveling on Richmond Parkway as well as dangerous chemical releases from heavy industry nearby. 2) Polluted Land. Iron Triangle ranks in the top 2% for the presence of toxic cleanup sites compared with all census tracts in California. Much of neighborhood land is near toxic brownfields abandoned by industry. 3) Polluted Groundwater. The Iron Triangle ranks in the top 1% for hazardous waste compared with all census tracts in California. Local groundwater is highly toxic and contaminated by fuel, heavy metals, volatile organic compounds and other carcinogens from Richmond’s industry. In sum, thousands of California’s most vulnerable citizens live in one of California’s most environmentally degraded, toxic environments. HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK: T +IFDFK<J <EM@IFED<EK8C ALJK@:< 9P I<JKFI@E> K?< contaminated earth back to its natural processes. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency defines environmental justice as: “everyone, regardless of race, color, national origin or income is entitled to

Toxic, Polluted Environment ...continue

equal protection from environmental harms and risks.” Residents of Iron Triangle deserve equal protection from severe environmental harms, after years of neglect and disinvestment. T $EJK8CCJ 9@FJN8C<J KF =@CK @E <EM@IFED<EK8C J:@<E:< to remove harmful chemicals and toxins from the soil that negatively impacted the health of Iron Triangle residents for decades.

Lack of Green Space

CHALLENGE: Residents of Iron Triangle suffer from a critical lack of green space. They live in a neighborhood with virtually no plants, no shrubs, and no trees. (Note: the tree canopy of Iron Triangle is a scant 5.8% – compared with a 25%-35% tree canopy recommended by the American Forest Organization). Residents long for greenery and green, natural spaces. In community meetings,residents ask, over and over again, for the City to “plant more plants and plant more trees.” Not having functional green spaces has a devastating impact on health. As sociobiologist E.O. Wilson describes in the book, “Biophilia,” “humans are hardwired to need connection with the natural world.” Being alienated from green space and nature is shown as a direct cause of diabetes, obesity, malnutrition, nearsightedness, asthma, depression, and anxiety. Conversely, our health is positively impacted by exposure to nature. Studies show that within 15 minutes of being in nature, stress levels goes down, and heart rate and blood pressure improve. Being in nature can reduce heart disease and improve life expectancy.

Lack of Green Space...cont.

HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK: T +IFM@;<J 8 M@9I8EK >I<<E Jpace for residents living in an “asphalt jungle” an opportunity to connect with the natural world. Multiple studies have shown that socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals tend to benefit the most from improved access to urban greenery. (Allen J, Balfour R (2014) Natural solutions for tackling health inequalities, UCL Institute of Health Equity.)

Neglected and Broken Public Spaces

CHALLENGE: While conditions continue to improve, there remains a severe lack of safe, green, vibrant public spaces to serve residents of this community. Public streets are blighted and the city struggles to prevent widespread dumping on city sidewalks. City parks are often overrun by homeless and are a magnet for criminal activity. The streets in the Iron Triangle are disproportionately dysfunctional when compared with the rest of the City. This level of dysfunction has an impact on community health. With few functional spaces where people come together, neighbors are prevented from forming bonds with one another. According to the social determinants of health, this type of social isolation has a devastating impact on community health. HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK: T #8I9FLI-8 will become the public square of the community and a safe vibrant space for people to congregate. PROJECT READINESS: The City of Richmond and Pogo Park previously collaborated to create the successful Elm Playlot which is now a local

Neglected and Broken

community hub and thriving public space receiving upwards of 20,000 visitors annually.

Public Spaces ...continue

Lack of Recreational Opportunities

CHALLENGE: Residents lack access to quality recreational opportunities for two reasons: 1) Lack of safe, affordable public spaces to recreate in the community. Most public spaces, including both parks and streets are dysfunctional and dangerous. Functional places to recreate are outside the neighborhood and cost money. Low income families do not have disposable income to pay for exercise classes. Even if they could leave, traveling outside the neighborhood to engage in physical activities is difficult because many residents do not own cars, and cannot safely travel on foot due to gang territories. 2) Crushing disinvestment in youth programs in Richmond have led to a dearth of programs for residents to recreate. According to the West Contra Costa Public Education Fund, a staggering 6,620 Richmond children lack access (the highest number compared with other cities in Contra Costa County) to quality programs that are designed to help them thrive. For adults, physical activities offerings are non-existent.

Poverty

CHALLENGE: Iron Triangle ranks in the top 10% of all 8,000 census tracts in California for poverty. Residents of Iron Triangle suffer from deep, generational poverty. Residents’ per capita income is

Poverty...cont.

$15,000; 59% of Iron Triangle families with children live below the federal poverty line. The median household income in Iron Triangle ($38,000) is half the median income in Contra Costa County ($88,000). HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK: The Project serves as an economic anchor providing jobs and job training in a neighborhood where there are few to no local jobs. People who work on our Project can walk to work, and learn skills in a supportive environment alongside people who look like them.

Poor-Performing Schools

CHALLENGE: Iron Triangle schools, underfunded and beleaguered, are struggling to educate and prepare children for a successful future. Because of the educational disinvestment, children suffer. When children of the Iron Triangle are old enough to attend school, the local schools they attend are ranked in the lowest 10% of all schools in California. Only 3% of 5th graders meet state standards in math and 7% meet basic standards in English proficiency. One of every four students in the Iron Triangle has a learning challenge. Beleaguered and underfunded schools lack the resources and capacity to provide high-need children with the support they need to reach their inherent potential. HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK: T +IFM@;<J 8 J8=< >I<<E G8IB JG8:< N?<I< :?@C;I<E can develop in healthy ways outside of school time, so that when they go to school they are more ready to engage in classroom learning.

Poor-Performing Schools

T +IFM@;<J 8 J8=< JG8:< JG8:< N?<I< :?@C;I<E :8E engage in free play. The latest pediatric research points to the critical role of play in healthy child development. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, “unstructured free play is essential to child development, as it contributes to the cognitive, physical, social, and emotional well-being of children and youth.” T I<8K<J 8E FLK;FFI :C8JJIFFD =FI LJ< 9P =@M< CF:8C schools within two blocks of the Project site. PROJECT READINESS: The City of Richmond and Pogo Park work closely with the Contra Costa School District and the five schools adjacent to Harbour-8 Park to use high-quality city parks with enriched play opportunities as a vehicle to spark and foster the healthy development of children – and prepare them for learning at school.

Linguistic Isolation

CHALLENGE: Iron Triangle ranks in the top 11% of all census tracts in California for linguistic isolation. Residents who suffer from linguistic isolation tend to have poor access to health and public services, experience more stress, racial discrimination, and reduced quality of life. 25% of Iron Triangle residents do not speak English well or at all. HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK: T +IFM@;<J 8 M@9I8EK GL9C@: JG8:< K?8K 8KKI8:KJ 8 N<8CK? F= visitors from diverse backgrounds giving people the opportunity to make connections across linguistic and cultural barriers. T +IFM@;<J 8 G8IB N@K? 9@C@E>L8C J@>E8>< @E E>C@J? and Spanish to make Latinx residents feel respected, recognized, and seen.

Linguistic Isolation

PROJECT READINESS: The City of Richmond and Pogo Park previously collaborated to create a successful model for bringing disparate members from different cultures together as one. The Pogo Park Community Resident Team is made up of 11 individuals whose ethnic backgrounds mirror the diverse demographics of the community.

Lack of Access to Affordable, Healthy Food

CHALLENGE: Iron Triangle is a federally recognized “food desert,” meaning that residents are critically challenged to get access to healthy food in their own neighborhood. Instead of purchasing food at markets selling fresh fruit and vegetables, residents are trapped in their own neighborhood and forced to buy unhealthy, processed meals from fast food restaurants, convenience stores, and corner markets. Poor access to healthy food has had a devastating and lasting impact on the people who live here, leading to the highest rates of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK: T +IFM@;<J 8 J8=< GL9C@: JG8:< KF ?FLJ< weekly farmers’ market. T +IFM@;<J 8 J8=< :FDDLE@KP ?L9 KF ;@JKI@9LK< =I<< healthy lunches in partnership with the Contra Costa County School district. PROJECT READINESS: The City of Richmond and Pogo Park worked together to make Elm Playlot a distribution for thousands of local children and youth to access free and healthy meals. The project is successful: last year Pogo Park distributed 11,000 free meals to local children and youth. Elm Playlot offers a weekly farmers’ market. The park serves fresh fruits and vegetables instead of processed food or soda, to change the culture around healthy food and healthy eating.

Lack of Access to Affordable, Healthy Food...cont.

We are poised and ready to apply this same model to Harbour-8 Park.

Toxic Stress

CHALLENGE: The latest public health research points to toxic stress as the root cause of poor health outcomes in low income communities of color. Community-based toxic stressors are the constant and cumulative burdens experienced by socially vulnerable communities. These toxic stressors affect everyone – from the young to the elderly – in different ways. UC Berkeley with support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, (the nation’s largest foundation focused solely on health) conducted research on the toxic stressors that most impact people in the Iron Triangle. These include: threats and fear of violence, social exclusion and segregation, food insecurity, lack of mobility, threat of housing displacement, environmental pollution and toxic exposures, poor quality education, inadequate or unaffordable basic services, discrimination, poverty, and job insecurity. If left unchecked, the stress itself is physically toxic, especially to child development and health. Brain imaging, biochemical tests, genetic testing and psychiatric trials show toxic stress ravages growing children – inviting maladies such as asthma, obesity, heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, kidney disease and stroke in adulthood. When children do not get a break from the stress – when adults cannot or do not know how to shield their children from it – their developing bodies go on a stress hormone production binge that can alter typical gene expression within their DNA. Those biological and developmental changes build up in a person’s body over a lifetime and can trigger lifelong health consequences that, ultimately, can shorten lives.

Toxic Stress...cont.

HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK: T I<8K<J 8 :LCKLI< K?8K 8GGIF8:?<J 8 GL9C@: NFIBJ project through the lens of healing toxic stress. T 0K@C@Q<J 8 :FDDLE@KP C<; GIF:ess that puts the power back into the hands of the people to make the changes they want to see in their neighborhood. T <<GCP <E>8><J K?< :FDDLE@KP @E <M<IP GIF:<JJ from design, implementation and management of public spaces. T I<8K<J 8 :LCKLI< K?8K 8ddresses community issues through the lens of implicit bias training, poverty and white privilege training. T +IFDFK<J 8 DF;<C F= ?<8CK?P <8K@E> 8E; ;@JKI@9LK<J free food. T +IFM@;<J 8 J8=< JG8:< K?8K @J =I<< =IFD M@FC<E:< where residents can connect with nature and come together. T #@I<J 8E; KI8@EJ I<J@;<EKJ N?F 8I< G8@; C@M@E> wages to learn skills to lift up their neighborhood. T -<JKFI<J <EM@IFED<EK8C ALJK@:< 9P I<KLIE@E> K?< scorched earth back to nature. T $DGC<D<EKJ 8 ?FC@JK@: GIFA<:K K?8K 8;;I<JJ<s every single toxic stressor. PROJECT READINESS: To measure the impact of our 12-year efforts, The City of Richmond and Pogo Park partnered with University of California, Berkeley professor Dr. Jason Coburn, a leader in the field of public health and community-based participatory research, to conduct a Research Study that "measures the multiple impacts of Elm Playlot on community health and well-being." The Elm Playlot Research Study is in the midst of tracking both qualitative and quantitative data, with preliminary results available in 2020.

Poor Health Outcomes

CHALLENGE: Toxic stress takes a drastic toll on the physical, social and emotional health of residents. Overall health statistics are among the worst levels for every indicator in the state. The list of poor outcomes is long but these are five of the worst: T Obesity: (51% of students in Richmond’s public schools are either overweight or obese, as are 58% of adults) T Mental Health:(Iron Triangle ranks in the top 10% for mental illness in all census tracts in CA, with 17% of adults diagnosed with mental health issues. Poor mental health stems from living in a toxic unhealthy environment, under the constant threat of gun violence, with no green spaces to be outside, and in a neighborhood where neighbors do not know neighbors because they fear going outside. T Asthma: (children rank in top .1% for asthma in California. Meaning 99.9% of California neighborhoods have children with lower asthma rates) T Diabetes: (Iron Triangle places in the top 10% for adults with diabetes in the state.) T Cardiovascular Disease: (Iron Triangle ranks in the top 15% for cardiovascular disease compared with the rest of California) HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK: Harbour-Park Expansion Project is an antidote to virtually every public health ill listed above. T Provides an answer to obesity: creating a safe public space, right in the heart of the neighborhood, where residents can be physically active. T Provides an answer to gun violence: transforming Harbour-8 into a safe public space, a neutral space for the surrounding community that is gun and violence free.

Poor Health Outcomes...cont.

T Provides an answer to asthma: creating a thriving green urban forest at Harbour-8 Park to clean and filter the air. T Provides an answer to mental illness and trauma: transforming Harbour-8 Park into a safe, green, natural oasis. Research shows that being in contact with nature - even just sitting beneath a tree - has a huge impact on one’s mental health. A recent study found that growing up with limited access to green space was associated with a 15% to 55% higher risk of developing 1 of 16 mental health conditions in adulthood.

Residents Marginalized and Disconnected from Government

CHALLENGE: Community residents are disengaged and disconnected from public works projects in their neighborhood. When government comes into a neighborhood to make improvements, many times it feels to residents that outsiders are coming in to do something “for” the people, rather than working with the people to make neighborhood improvements together. During the process, residents attend obligatory design meetings and offer their opinions about what is needed, but these experiences are often superficial and disconnected from the final outcome. Consequently, most Iron Triangle renewal projects fail to take hold. In other words, improvements made to a neighborhood’s physical environment do not translate into making improvements to the community as a whole or to its people. HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED: G Provides another opportunity to deepen bonds between residents and city staff and bring our collaboration to another level. T :KJ 8J 8 =FI:< DLCK@GC@ I<J@;<EKJ KF :@KP projects. T $DGC<D<EKJ 8 C8I>< GL9C@c works project by using the community led model, and placing the power in the hands of the people.

Displacement

CHALLENGE: As real estate values in the Bay Area skyrocket, people are aware that Richmond is the last frontier for affordable housing on the San Francisco Bay. With the ferry service transporting riders from Richmond to San Francisco in 47 minutes, the reality of gentrification, followed by displacement, is fast approaching. Gentrification means those with more money and power buy up the land, shutting out local residents from benefiting from improvements in their neighborhood. 66% of Iron Triangle residents are renters (compared with 35% in Contra Costa). People who do not own their homes will never be a part of the new real estate values that are created when improvements to the neighborhood are made. As the sentiment goes: this new neighborhood is created for someone else, not for us. HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK: T *LI +IFA<:K LJ<J =FLI ;@JGC8:<D<EK JKI8K<>@es (please refer to displacement strategies discussed in Question 9B.)

People Are Isolated

CHALLENGE: People are isolated due to the following conditions: T "LE M@FC<E:< =FI:<J G<FGC< KF JK8P @EJ@;< T )<@>?9FI?FF; :FE;@K@FEJ @E:CL;@E> 9C@>?K JKI<<KJ and sidewalks covered in litter, no trees or greenery, broken sidewalks and fast driving cars, do not encourage residents to go outside. T /?<I< 8I< EF J8=< N8CB@E> FI 9@B@E> IFLK<J K?8K GIFM@;< residents with a chance to meet other residents on the street; instead, residents travel alone by car. T /?<I< @J EF GC8:< KF >F @E K?< E<@>?9FI?FF; 2?@C< K?<I< are current efforts to improve Richmond’s downtown Main Street, many businesses remain shuttered and boarded up.

People Are Isolated

T C8I>< @DD@>I8EK GFGLC8K@FE K?8K @J 90% people of color has no public places to come together to mix with people and cross cultural lines. T /?< I<JLCK @J K?8K G<FGC< 8I< :LK-off and disconnected. HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK: T E89C<J I<J@;<EKJ KF ><K FLKJide, in a safe, green, public space, gather together with other neighbors, and forge social bonds.

Hopelessness

CHALLENGE: Decades of disinvestment in Iron Triangle leaves a lasting and devastating impact: hopelessness. Residents look out their windows to see a long line of professional experts come into the community to improve the neighborhood “for” the people, but, apart from superficial community input sessions, the real community is rarely, if ever, deeply involved in the actual work of transforming their own community. Without deep and authentic community involvement, most urban renewal projects fail to actually transform anything in the community except for a physical structure. HOW THIS CHALLENGE CONTRIBUTES TO NEED FOR HARBOUR-8 PARK: T E89les residents to get involved in a project that already has a proven track record of success in their community. There is a need for projects that are real and that display visible signs of change. PROJECT READINESS: T CD +C8PCFK @J 8E FM<IN?<CD@E> JL:cess in a neighborhood where every other project failed. One of the keys to our partner Pogo Park’s success is that big changes were made but were implemented slowly over a long time. Local people could watch

Hopelessness continue...

other people in their neighborhood working in real time and rebuilding a park. The success of Elm Playlot has electrified the neighborhood and has become a beacon of hope and a symbol for the entire community that change is possible.

B. How will the project benefit the health and quality of life for youth, seniors, and families by improving the community’s recreational, social, cultural, environmental, educational, and economic conditions? HEALTH and quality of life conditions

How the PROJECT will benefit the HEALTH and quality of life for youth, seniors, and families.

Recreational

The Project will benefit and positively impact the health and quality of life of youth, seniors, and families by providing recreational opportunities in a neighborhood where there are few (as outlined in 9A). The Projects adds the following recreational opportunities: T+8K?N8PJ 8E; >8K?<I@E> 8I<8J K?8K GIFM@;< JG8:<J =FI walking, biking, and other intergenerational, active and non-active recreation that can improve health and help decrease obesity and diabetes. T +Caces for children to play and engage in physical activity, such as a zipline and climbing structure, to improve overall physical health, take safe risks, destress, make friends and have fun. T +IFM@;<J =I<< I<:I<8K@FE8C 8:K@M@K@<J =FI I<J@;<EKJ with no barriers to participate. T +IFM@;<J I<:I<8K@FE8C FGGFIKLE@K@<J K?8K 8I< designed to help children grow and thrive.

Social

The Project benefits the health and quality of life of residents by improving social opportunities and social cohesion in a neighborhood where there are few places

Social...cont.

to come together as one (as outlined in 9A) by: T +IFM@;@E> 8 DL:? E<<;<; Community Center. Open six days a week from 9-5, the Community Center will provide after-school programs where youth at high risk will receive refuge and mentoring, helping to reduce crime rates, court costs, and other costs to the community. T /?< FDDLE@KP <EK<I N@CC 8CJF =LE:K@FE 8J 8 J8=< neutral ground where seniors can socialize, residents can meet each other, and families can bond. T +IFM@;ing picnic tables and barbeque areas where social groups can connect. Building social capital and cohesion is proven to be the number one indicator of community health. T +IFM@;@E> GC8P JKIL:KLI<J N?<I< :?@C;I<E 8E; G8I<EKJ can meet, come together and socialize. Neighbors meeting neighbors builds social capital and improves health. T +IFM@;@E> 8 J8=< M@9I8EK 8E; 9<8LK@=LC I<:I<8K@FE destination in a neighborhood with high levels of gun violence reduces gun violence, and toxic stressors that lead to poor health outcomes. T +IFM@;@E> 8 J8=< >I<<E 8E; :C<8E GL9C@: JG8:< provides the perception of safety, which is one of the hardest possible barriers to cross. Public spaces play a vital role in the social life of communities and community well being. Public spaces offer many benefits: the therapeutic benefits of quiet time spent on a park bench; places where people can display their culture and identities and learn awareness of diversity and difference; opportunities for children and young

Social...cont.

people to meet, play or simply ‘hang out’. All have important benefits and help to create local attachments, which are at the heart of a sense of community.

Cultural

The Project benefits the quality of life for youth, seniors, and families by improving the cultural conditions of the community by: T $EJK8CC@E> GL9C@: 8IK 8E; 8D<E@K@<J N?@:? I<=C<:K K?< demographics of local residents and celebrate the history and diverse cultures of the Iron Triangle. Harbour-8 Park’s public art, include a visual celebration of famed Richmond resident Lillie Mae Jones. T -<=C<:K@E> ;@M<IJ< :LCKLI<J @E K?< ;<J@>E <C<D<EKJ F= the site such as the specific design of the BBQ amenities, railroad-themed lights, signs, and a train on top of the archway to reflect the history of the community.

Environmental

The Project benefits the health and quality of life of residents by improving the environment: T P KI8EJ=FID@E> 8 M8:8EK CFK @EKF 8 M@9I8EK G8IB N@K? 8 community center, play spaces and multimodal pathways, the Project replaces blighted properties with functional public buildings and outdoor community spaces. T P <OG8E;@E> 8E <O@JK@E> G8IB N@K? 8;;<; landscaping, public art, wayfaring signs and barbeque areas, the Project improves the appearance of the community. T P @E:FIGFI8K@E> G<Ivious surfaces such as bioswales, the Project will filter stormwater and remove pollutants out of the water system.

Environmental continue...

T P GC8EK@E> ;IFL>?K KFC<I8EK :C@D8K< 8GGIFGI@8K< EFEinvasive turf, trees, shrubs, plants and ground cover, the Project adds vegetation to remove CO2, reduce heat island effect, and mitigate against climate change. T P 8;;@E> 98:B E8KLI8C <C<D<EKJ 8E; I<JKFI@E> E8KLI8C processes to the landscape, the Project gives residents the power to control their environment and promotes environmental justice.

Educational

The Project benefits the educational quality of life for youth, seniors, and families by: T $EJK8CC@E> >8I;<EJ K?8K N@CC GIFM@;< 8 DF;<C =FI :?@C;I<E from the local schools to learn about the natural world. School children can play and get their hands in the soil while the discover how plants and animals grow and how water can be conserved. T ;;@E> 8 FDDLE@KP <EK<I N?<I< J<E@FIJ PFLK? 8E; families can be tutored, coached, and taught a wide range of health and life skills.

Economic (and The Project offers the following economic benefits: advancing solutions to prevent displacement, if a) jobs for residents of disadvantaged communities; applicable) b) jobs for residents with barriers to employment; and c) opportunities for workforce development and job training. The Project will provide jobs and training to 150 local residents, (youth, adults, seniors) and Conservation Corps members. Over the past decade, Pogo Park created 172 living-wage jobs for people living in disadvantaged neighborhoods; paid for 17,000 hours of workforce development training; and pumped over $1.75 million in wages into the pockets of local people.

Economic (and Our model is effective: on a recent Harbour-8 advancing solutions to Housing Related Parks Program Grant (HRPP), a prevent displacement, if total of $600,000 came into the City for design, permits and construction; through our partnership applicable)...cont. with Pogo Park, we directed $219,396 in wages to residents between January and June 2019. These jobs created by the HRPP grant translated into relevant job skills and training, increasing the future earnings of residents. The Project advances the following solutions to prevent displacement*: 1) Enact a Health in All Policies ordinance/resolution to integrate health considerations and performance standards into all government practices (e.g., Richmond Health in All Policies Ordinance and Strategy) The City of Richmond enacted a landmark Health in All Policies Plan (HiAP), the first of its kind in all cities in California. HiAP mandates that, when city staff engage in public work projects, they do so through the lens of community health and equity. 2) Establish and fund land trusts to build community ownership of property and increase access to green space and other health promoting resources (e.g., Los Angeles Neighborhood Land Trust; Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative)* Our key partner, Pogo Park, partnered with The Conservation Fund to acquire and control the land that surrounds the Harbour-8 Project site. The aim: to place that land in community land trust to provide a benefit to the community, and hedge against displacement. The Conservation Fund secured a loan from the Packard Foundation to acquire 17,500 square feet of private land adjacent to Harbour-8 Park. By placing land that surrounds the park into a community land trust, the

Economic (and intention is to capture a portion of rising property values advancing solutions to and reinvest those values into long-term programs that prevent displacement, if serve the community and hedge against displacement. applicable)...cont.

3) Equip local residents, youth, and others with strong community ties to become civic leaders and decisionmakers (e.g., Urban Habitat Boards and Commissions Leadership Institute; Liberty Hill Foundation Commissions Training Program) Our Project utilizes a community-led model (described previously), that is designed to equip (and empower) local residents, youth and others with strong community ties to become civic leaders and decision-makers. 4) Collect/analyze displacement and health equity data (e.g., Urban Displacement Project; California Health Disadvantage Index) The City and Pogo Park partnered with UC Berkeley School of Public Health to collect and analyze displacement and health equity data. UC Berkeley’s role on the Project is to provide detailed health statistics and relevant data about residents of the Iron Triangle living around and near the Project site to promote health equity. *The above displacement solutions are outlined in "HEALTHY DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT DISPLACEMENT," Manal J. Aboelata, Rachel Bennett, Elva Yañez, Ana Bonilla, and Nikta Akhavan. Prevention Institute, July 2017; www.preventioninstitute.org)

A Meeting Date/Year

7/24/19

B Meeting Type, Venue, Address

Design/Focus Group Meeting; Community Resident Meeting; Bay Area Rescue Mission, 200 Macdonald Avenue, Richmond 94801

Times am/pm

10:30-12:00

Day of Week Description of meeting location/time convenience

The City's community partner, Pogo Park, organized – and provided incentives to – a core team of 15 community residents to form a dedicated Prop 68 "Community Outreach Team" (COT). The COT is comprised entirely of community residents diverse in age, race, and gender. Together, they represent the demographic make-up of their own community. Members of Pogo Park's COT met directly with residents living at Richmond's Bay Area Rescue Mission, a homeless shelter Wednesday within walking distance of the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project site. This meeting was convenient for residents because it took place at a regularly-scheduled meeting at Bay Area Rescue Mission where residents were already present. Getting input from Richmond's homeless population is critical because many of them regulary use the Richmond Greenway. It is important to hear their voice, understand their needs and concerns, and involve them in the continuing transformation of Harbour-8 Park.

Pogo Park's COT set up a Community Outreach Station (a 14' x 14' pop-up tent with tables, chairs, signage, project location maps, and design materials) for multiple days at Harbour-8 Park to enable residents to actively engage and participate in the design of Harbour-8 Park. The Community Outreach Station was located at the Harbour-8 Park Project site, which is within the critically underserved community. Having multiple Wednesday community design meetings on different days and at different times provided a convenient and accessible method for residents who lack access to private transportation – or who are juggling employment and family schedules – to, in the words of Pogo Park's COT, "have a say-so" in one of the most important and potentially impactful public works projects in their own community.

Meeting Date/Year

Description of methods used to invite residents to this meeting

7/24/19

To encourage community residents to participate in the design/focus group meeting, this meeting took place at the Bay Area Rescue Mission's regularly-scheduled community meeting where residents were already present.

Number of residents General description of who participated in residents who participated in this meeting this meeting

A broad representation of community members that included children, youth, adults, seniors, and residents with disabilities.

7/24/19

The City partnered with Pogo Park, a community-based nonprofit organization that is known for their highly skilled, experienced, and practiced process of deep and authentic community engagement. From start to finish, Pogo Park led the entire community engagement efforts for the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project. To encourage residents to participate at Harbour-8 Park's Community Outreach Station, Pogo Park: 1) e-mailed invitations, over multiple days, to 4,000 Richmond residents; 2) provided cash incentives for community residents to participate; 3) posted flyers in high-traffic areas that included the Nevin Community Center, local churches, businesses (barbershops, restaurants, bike shop), nonprofit service providers, schools, and on every lampost on every street within 1/4 mile of the Project Site; and 4) organized the COT to conduct door-to-door invitations to every home and business within 1/4 mile of the Project site to participate in the bottoms-up, community driven, design process led for Harbour-8 Park.

A broad representation of community members including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, families, people with disabilities.

7/24/19

Community Design Meeting at Pogo Park's pop-up "Community Outreach Station" located at the Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1pm - 5pm

7/23/19

As above

1pm - 5pm

Tuesday

As above

7/23/19

As above

As above.

7/22/19

As above

1pm - 5pm

Monday

As above

7/22/19

As above

As above.

7/20/19

As above

10am - 5pm

Saturday

As above

7/20/19

As above

As above.

7/19/19

As above

1pm - 5pm

Friday

As above

7/19/19

As above

As above.

7/18/19

As above

1pm - 5pm

Thursday

As above

7/18/19

As above

As above.

7/17/19

As above

1pm - 5pm

Wednesday As above

7/17/19

As above

As above.

6pm - 8pm

The COT: 1) presented the latest iteration of a communitygenerated vision for Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project at the Iron Triangle neighborhood council meeting; and 2) set up a design station at this meeting to engage community residents Wednesday attending the meeting to provide design ideas for Harbour-8 Park's. Having an evening meeting at Nevin Community Center in the heart of the critically underserved neighborhood provided residents with another convenient and accessible place and time to provide design ideas and feedback for Harbour-8 Park.

A broad representation of community members including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, families, and people with disabilities.

7/17/19

Community Design Meeting; Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council, Nevin Community Center, 598 Nevin Avenue, Richmond 94801

7/17/19

Pogo Park set up a Community Design Station for Harbour8 Park at the Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council meeting where residents were already present.

7/16/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Design Council 9am - 12pm; Meeting; Pogo Park's Harbour1pm - 3pm 8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

Tuesday

Pogo Park's COT met repeatedly over one year (see below) to: 1) create an iterative, community-driven, bottoms-up design for Harbour-8 Park; and 2) to work in partnership with staff from the City of Richmond and professional experts (architects, landscape architects, engineers, cost estimators etc.) to produce a conceptual design to include in the City's 2019 Prop 68 grant application. Except where noted, all all COT meetings were held in Pogo Park's office at 909 Ohio Avenue, adjacent to the Harbour-8 Park Project site, in the very heart of one of California's most critically underserved communities. This convenient location provided easy access for members of community residents to participate in the process to design the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project – and provided a way for community members to work together dynamically as a group, exchange and explore ideas, and – slowly, over time – create an iterative design for Harbour-8 Park that could meet the recreational, social, health, cultural, environmental, and educational needs of the entire community.

7/15/19

As above

1pm - 3pm

Monday

7/12/19

As above

1pm - 3pm

7/11/19

As above

10am - 12pm; 1pm - 3pm

7/11/19

Community Design Meeting; Youth Engagement Meeting; Pogo Park's Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

7/10/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's 10am - 12pm Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

7/8/19

As above

10am - 12pm

1pm - 3pm

7/16/19

To ensure deep and authentic participation of a broad representation of community residents, the City partnered with Pogo Park, a community-based nonprofit to organize efforts to engage local residents to create a communitydriven design for Harbour-8 Park. To that end, Pogo Park provided incentives to residents to be members of the COT.

A broad representation of community residents including: youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, families, and people with disabilities.

As above

7/15/19

As above

Friday

As above

7/12/19

As above

Thursday

As above

7/11/19

As above

Thursday

Pogo Park recruited 11 youth from the community to participate in a four week "Photovoice" project. In Photovoice, Pogo Park provided youth with cameras and instructed them to take pictures of: 1) what they liked about their neighborhood and neighborhood parks; 2) what they did not like; and 3) what they would like to see changed. These youth-focused meetings, held at Pogo Park's office adjacent to Harbour-8 Park on the Greenway, was a convenient meeting place for the youth. Additionally, feedback from these youth-center meetings enabled the COT to deeply understand what youth from the community wanted to see at Harbour-8 Park.

7/11/19

Pogo Park provided incentives to youth who participated in the 4-week Photovoice project.

Youth from the community, diverse in race and gender.

7/10/19

A broad representation of community residents including: youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

Pogo Park's COT worked dynamically together as a group to gather, exchange, explore and discuss ideas, and, over time, created an iterative design for Harbour-8 Park that could meet Wednesday the recreational, social, health, cultural, environmental, and educational needs of the local community. This meeting was conveniently located in an office adjacent to Project site. Monday

As above

7/8/19

As above

6/27/19

Pogo Park provided incentives to youth who participated in the 4-week Photovoice project.

Youth from the community, diverse in race and gender.

6/20/19

Pogo Park provided incentives to youth who participated in the 4-week Photovoice project.

As above

6/27/19

Community Design Meeting; Youth Engagement Meeting; Pogo Park's Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

10am - 12pm

Thursday

6/20/19

Community Design Meeting; Youth Engagement Meeting; Pogo Park's Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

10am - 12pm

Thursday

As above

A 6/13/19

Community Design Meeting; Youth Engagement Meeting; Pogo Park's Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

6/13/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

6/11/19

B 6/13/19

Pogo Park provided incentives to youth who participated in the 4-week Photovoice project.

Thursday

Pogo Park's COT worked dynamically together as a group to gather, exchange, explore and discuss ideas, and, over time, created an iterative design for Harbour-8 Park that could meet the recreational, social, health, cultural, environmental, and educational needs of the local community. This meeting was conveniently located in an office adjacent to Project site.

10am - 12pm

Tuesday

As above

3pm - 5pm

6/4/19

As above

5/28/19

As above

4/10/11

Community Design Meeting; Design Review Board; Richmond Room, 440 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond 94804

4/3/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's 9am - 11am Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

Community Design Meeting; Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council, Nevin Community Center, 598 Nevin Avenue, Richmond 94801

As above

6/13/19

A broad representation of community residents including: youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

As above

6/11/19

As above

Thursday

As above

6/6/19

As above

10am - 12pm

Tuesday

As above

6/4/19

As above

10am - 12pm

Tuesday

As above

5/28/19

As above

Thursday

Pogo Park's COT presented design ideas for Harbour-8 Park to Richmond's Design Review Board, an advisory board comprised of community residents – and invited design ideas and feedback.

4/10/11

The COT shared the Harbour-8 Park design with the city's Design Review Board and invited input about the design from community residents, a meeting where residents were already present.

A broad representation of residents that include: youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

4/3/19

A broad representation of community residents including: youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

6pm - 8pm

Pogo Park's Community Outreach Team presented the latest iterative version of the vision for Harbour-8 Park's design and invited attendees at the neighborhood council meeting to provide additional design ideas and input. Having an evening Wednesday meeting at Nevin Community Center in the heart of the critically underserved neighborhood provided residents with a convenient and accessible place, time, and method to provide design ideas and feedback.

3/20/19

Pogo Park's COT shared the Harbour-8 Park design with the Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council and invited input about the design from community residents, a meeting where residents were already present.

A broad representation of community members including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, families, and people with disabilities.

6pm - 8pm

Pogo Park's Community Outreach Team scheduled a special meeting with seniors who live in a 64-unit affordable housing complex adjacent to Harbour-8 Park. Meeting with seniors in Wednesday their apartment complex, at a time convenient to them, provided a convenient and accessible place and time for them to provide design ideas and feedback for how to make Harbour8 Park serve the needs of seniors in the community.

3/12/19

Pogo Park's COT presented to seniors living in the Harbour View Senior Apartments, a meeting where residents were already present.

Seniors - able-bodied, immigrant, and disabled.

Pogo Park's COT worked dynamically together as a group to gather, exchange, explore and discuss ideas, and, over time, created an iterative design for Harbour-8 Park that could meet the recreational, social, health, cultural, environmental, and educational needs of the local community. This meeting was conveniently located in an office adjacent to Project site.

3/8/19

A broad representation of community residents including: youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

As above

1/28/19

As above

Thursday

As above

1pm - 4pm

As above

6/6/19

3/20/19

10am - 12pm

6pm - 8pm

3/12/19

Community Design Meeting; Harbour View Senior Apartments; 25 Harbour Way, Richmond 94801

3/8/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's 9am - 12pm Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

1/28/19

Community Design Meeting; Harbour-Park; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

9am - 12pm

Friday

Monday

1/25/19

Community Design Meeting; Harbour View Senior Apartments; 25 Harbour Way, Richmond 94801

1/24/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

1/24/19

Community Design Meeting; Arts & Culture Commission; Richmond Room, 440 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond 94804

1/21/19

Community Design Meeting; Harbour-Park; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/19/19

Community Design Meeting at Pogo Park's pop-up "Community Outreach Station" located at the Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/18/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

11am - 1pm

3pm - 5pm

6pm - 8pm

9am - 2pm

1pm - 4pm

8am - 4pm

Friday

Pogo Park's Community Outreach Team scheduled a special meeting with seniors who live in a 64-unit affordable housing complex adjacent to Harbour-8 Park. Meeting with seniors in their complex, at a time convenient to them, provided a convenient and accessible place and time for them to provide design ideas and feedback for how to make Harbour-8 Park serve the needs of seniors in the community.

Thursday

Pogo Park's COT worked dynamically together as a group to gather, exchange, explore and discuss ideas, and, over time, created an iterative design for Harbour-8 Park that could meet the recreational, social, health, cultural, environmental, and educational needs of the local community. This meeting was conveniently located in an office adjacent to Project site.

Thursday

Pogo Park's COT presented design ideas for Harbour-8 Park to Richmond's Arts & Culture Commission, a commission comprised of community residents – and invited design ideas and feedback.

Monday

On Martin Luther King Day National Holiday, Pogo Park's COT set up a full-scale mock-up of proposed design improvements for Harbour-8 Park onsite. Additionally, the COT set up an onsite pop-up Community Outreach Station that featured a 1/4" scale model of Harbour-8 Park with 1/4" scale model of multiple recreational features that community residents had proposed during earlier community outreach efforts. Participants of this Community Design Meeting were invited to select the recreational features they desired, then move and place them anywhere they wanted on the scale model of Harbour-8 Park. In this way, residents could create and provide their own design ideas for Harbour-8 Expansion Project. This one-day event was convenient for residents and generated a significant amount of design ideas that would help to shape the community's design vision vision for the Prop 68 grant application.

Saturday

Pogo Park's COT set up a pop-up Community Outreach Station conveniently located onsite at Harbour-8 Park to obtain design ideas and input from community residents walking on the Richmond Greenway path. These informal meetings provided an accessible method to engage community residents who routinely use the Greenway but who are unlikely to attend a formal community engagement meeting.

Friday

Pogo Park's COT worked dynamically together as a group to gather, exchange, explore and discuss ideas, and, over time, created an iterative design for Harbour-8 Park that could meet the recreational, social, health, cultural, environmental, and educational needs of the local community. This meeting was conveniently located in an office adjacent to Project site.

1/25/19

Pogo Park's COT presented to seniors living in the Harbour View Senior Apartments, a meeting where residents were already present.

1/24/19

Pogo Park's COT shared the Harbour-8 Park design with the City's Arts and Culture Commission and invited input about the design from community residents, a meeting where residents were already present.

1/21/19

Pogo Park organized a meeting between the Pogo Park's COT and design professionals to create a conceptual design for Harbour-8 Park. Scheduling the COT to attend ensured that the community residents were already present and would have a "say-so" at important meetings that would shape the final design for Harbour-8 Park.

1/19/19

The City partnered with Pogo Park, a community-based nonprofit organization that is highly skilled, experienced, and practiced in deep and authentic community engagement. Pogo Park led the community outreach efforts for the Harbour-8 Park project. To encourage community participation at the Harbour-8 Community Outreach Station, Pogo Park: 1) e-mailed invitations, over multiple days, to 4,000 Richmond residents; 2) provided cash incentives for community residents to participate; 3) posted flyers in high-traffic areas that included the neighborhood community center, churches, businesses (barbershops, restaurants), nonprofit service providers, schools, and on every lampost within 1/4 mile of the Project Site.

1/18/19

Seniors - able-bodied, immigrant, and disabled.

A broad representation of community residents including: youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

372

A broad representation of community residents including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

1/18/19

Community Design Meeting at Pogo Park's pop-up "Community Outreach Station" located at the Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/17/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's 9am - 12pm Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

1pm - 4pm

1/17/19

Community Design Meeting; held at Pogo Park's pop-up "Community Outreach Station" located at the Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/17/19

Community Design Meeting to obtain design ideas directly from residents during "Door to Door Outreach" to homes and businesses within 1/4 mile of Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/16/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's 9am - 12pm; 1pm - 3pm Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

1pm - 4pm

Friday

Thursday

Pogo Park's COT worked together to discuss and finalize the design ideas for Harbour-8 Park and prepare the full-scale and 1/4" scale model of the proposed design in time for the big community engagement event on MLK Day, 1/21/19.

Thursday

Pogo Park's Community Outreach Team begun the process of knocking on every door and business within 1/4 mile of the Harbour-8 Park Project site to engage and solicit design ideas and input directly from community residents.

Pogo Park's COT worked together to discuss and finalize the design ideas for Harbour-8 Park and prepare the full-scale and Wednesday 1/4" scale model of the proposed design in time for the big community engagement event on MLK Day, 1/21/19.

1/18/19

1/17/19

The City partnered with Pogo Park to lead and direct the community outreach efforts for the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project. Pogo Park provided cash incentives for community residents to participate.

1/16/19

A broad representation of community residents including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

1/16/19

Community Design Meeting; held at Pogo Park's pop-up "Community Outreach Station" located at the Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/16/19

1/15/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's 9am - 12pm; 1pm - 4pm Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

1pm - 4pm

Pogo Park's COT set up a pop-up Community Outreach Station conveniently located onsite at Harbour-8 Park to obtain design ideas and input from community residents walking on Wednesday the Richmond Greenway path. These informal meetings provided an accessible method to engage community residents who routinely use the Greenway but who are unlikely to attend a formal community engagement meeting.

1pm - 4pm

Pogo Park's Community Outreach Team begun the process of knocking on every door and business within 1/4 mile of the Wednesday Harbour-8 Park Project Site to solicit design ideas and input directly from community residents.

1/15/19

Community Design Meeting; held at Pogo Park's pop-up "Community Outreach Station" located at the Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/15/19

1/14/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's 9am - 12pm; 1pm - 4pm Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

1pm - 4pm

Tuesday

Pogo Park's Community Outreach Team begun the process of knocking on every door and business within 1/4 mile of the Harbour-8 Park Project Site to solicit design ideas and input directly from community residents.

Monday

1/16/19

1/15/19

1/14/19

A broad representation of community residents including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

101

A broad representation of community residents including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

1/14/19

Community Design Meeting; held at Pogo Park's pop-up "Community Outreach Station" located at the Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/14/19

1pm - 4pm

1/12/19

Community Design Meeting; held at Pogo Park's pop-up "Community Outreach Station" located at the Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/12/19

1/11/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's 9am - 12pm Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

1pm - 4pm

Monday

Saturday

Friday

1/14/19

1/12/19

1/11/19

A broad representation of community residents including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

1/11/19

Community Design Meeting; held at Pogo Park's pop-up "Community Outreach Station" located at the Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/11/19

1/10/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's 9am - 12pm Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

1pm - 4pm

1/10/19

Community Design Meeting; held at Pogo Park's pop-up "Community Outreach Station" located at the Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/10/19

1/9/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's 9am - 12pm; 1pm - 4pm Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

1pm - 4pm

Friday

Thursday

Pogo Park's Community Outreach Team continued the process of knocking on every door and business within 1/4 mile of the Harbour-8 Park Project Site to solicit design ideas and input directly from community residents.

1/11/19

1/10/19

A broad representation of community residents including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

1/10/19

A broad representation of community residents including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

1/9/19

Community Design Meeting; held at Pogo Park's pop-up "Community Outreach Station" located at the Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/9/19

1/8/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

1/8/19

Community Design Meeting; held at Pogo Park's pop-up "Community Outreach Station" located at the Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/8/19

1/7/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

1pm - 4pm

Tuesday

Monday

1/9/19

1/8/19

1/7/19

A broad representation of community residents including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

1/7/19

Community Design Meeting; held at Pogo Park's pop-up "Community Outreach Station" located at the Harbour-8 Park Project Site; Harbour Way and Richmond Greenway, Richmond 94801

1/7/19

1/4/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

1/3/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

12/20/18

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Team Meeting; Pogo Park's 10am - 12pm Harbour-8 Greenway Office, 909 Ohio Avenue, Richmond 94801

12/19/18

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Meeting; Pogo Park's Elm 10am - 12pm Playlot Office, 720 Elm Avenue, Richmond 94801

12/18/19

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Meeting; Pogo Park's Elm 10am - 12pm Playlot Office, 720 Elm Avenue, Richmond 94801

1pm - 4pm

Monday

Pogo Park's Community Design Council set up a pop-up Community Outreach Station onsite at Harbour-8 Park to obtain design ideas and input from community residents walking on the Richmond Greenway path.

Monday

Pogo Park's Community Outreach Team began the process of knocking on every door and business within 1/4 mile of the Harbour-8 Park Project Site to solicit design ideas and input directly from community residents.

Friday

Pogo Park's COT met to: 1) produce a rough design vision for Harbour-8 as a tool to engage community residents; 2) assemble materials to be used in community engagement efforts; and 3) devise a plan to reach out and connect with all key stakeholders (neighbors, businesses, schools, transportation, community-based service agencies/providers) within a half-mile radius of Harbour-8 Park.

Thursday

As above

Wednesday As above

Tuesday

As above

1/7/19

1/4/19

1/3/19

12/20/18

12/19/18

12/18/19

As above

A broad representation of community residents including: children, youth, adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A broad representation of community residents including: adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

A 12/17/19

B Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Meeting; Pogo Park's Elm Playlot Office, 720 Elm Avenue, Richmond 94801

12/10/18

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Meeting; Scientific Art Studio, Richmond 94801

12/4/18

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Meeting; Scientific Art Studio, Richmond 94801

11/27/18

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Meeting; Scientific Art Studio, Richmond 94801

11/26/18

Community Design Meeting; Community Outreach/Design Meeting; Scientific Art Studio, Richmond 94801

1pm - 3pm

2pm - 3pm

1pm - 4pm

1pm - 2pm

Monday

As above

Monday

Pogo Park's Community Design Team met with artists at Scientific Art Studio to review the first conceptual rendering for the next phase of improvements at Harbour-8 Park.

Tuesday

Pogo Park's Community Design Team met with key project partners (Vallier Design Associates – landscape architect; Scientific Art Studio - custom fabrication; Lawrence Construction - general contractor) to discuss, review, and narrow down what was possible re: the community's design ideas for Harbour-8 Park.

Tuesday

As above

Monday

Pogo Park's Community Design Team met with artists from Scientific Art Studio to agree on the elements to be included in the initial concept design rendering for Harbour-8 Park.

12/17/19

As above

12/10/18

Pogo Park organized a meeting between Pogo Park's COT and design professionals to create a conceptual design for Harbour-8 Park. Scheduling the meeting at Scientific Art Studio, a business conveniently located in the Iron Triangle neighborhood, ensured that community residents were already present and would have a "say-so" at important meetings that would shape the final design for Harbour-8 Park.

12/4/18

11/27/18

11/26/18

As above

TOTAL # OF RESIDENT ENGAGEMENT

A broad representation of community residents including: adults, seniors, immigrants, and people with disabilities.

2,592

California State Parks

Community FactFinder Report

Project ID: 7949 Coordinates: 37.9314, -122.3503 Date: 07/18/2019

This is your project report for the site you have defined. Please refer to your Project ID above in any future communications about the project. PROJECT AREA STATISTICS

County:

PROJECT AREA MAP

Contra Costa

City:

Richmond

Total Population:

8,960

Youth Population:

2,519

Senior Population:

901

Households Without Access to a Car:

592

Number of People in Poverty:

2,235

Median Household Income:

$37,873

Per Capita Income:

$16,882

Park Acres:

14.84

Park Acres per 1,000 Residents:

1.66

REPORT BACKGROUND The project statistics have been calculated based on half mile radius around the point location selected. Only park acres within the project area's half mile radius are reported. Population and people in poverty are calculated by determining the percent of any census block-groups that intersect with the project area. The project area is then assigned the sum of all the census block-group portions. An equal distribution in census block-groups is assumed. Rural areas are calculated at a census block level to improve results. Median household and per capita income are calculated as a weighted average of the census block- group values that fall within the project area.

SCORP Community FactFinder is a service of the California Department of Parks and Recreation www.parks.ca.gov

More information on the calculations is available on the methods page » Demographics—American Community Survey (ACS) 5year estimates 2012-2016; Decennial 2010 Census; the margin of error (MOE) was not analyzed. Parks—California Protected Areas Database 2017a CFF adjusted (5/2018) - more information at http://www.CALands.org. Parks and park acres area based on best available source information but may not always contain exact boundaries or all parks in specific locations. Parks are defined further in the 2015 SCORP (pg. 4). Users can send updated information on parks to SCORP@parks.ca.gov

SCORP Community FactFinder created by GreenInfo Network www.greeninfo.org in consultation with CA Dept. of Parks and Rec

APPLICANT CAPACITY 1. Describe up to three park or other construction projects completed by the APPLICANT. Include:

project address scope of work total project cost funding sources start date, and date of completion

The City of Richmond has a significant amount of experience completing grant-funded park projects, as well as other capital improvement projects (CIP). Annually the City of Richmond CIP/Engineering Department completes approximately $10-$12 million of grant-funded projects. The City staffing for these types of projects includes Engineering staff who handle the design process, including procurement and development of Plans, Specifications, and Engineering Estimates (PS&E), construction bid awards, construction management, and record keeping and reporting. The City also includes a program manager who assists the Engineering staff in the design, public outreach, construction management, and preparing reimbursement requests. The City also has a Grants Manager in the Finance Department to ensure expenditures and reporting are completed pursuant to grant agreements. The City’s Compliance Manager from the Employment and Training Department ensures there is a rigorous review of all bids, including their compliance with City ordinances, State Law, and Federal requirements, when applicable. The Compliance Manager also reviews projects for compliance with prevailing wage requirements. The City is well equipped to manage these types of grant-funded projects and has a long history of successfully completing these projects. Project Name

Unity Park

Elm Playlot Expansion and Renovation

Southside Park

Project Address

Richmond Greenway, between 4th St. – 8th Street and Marina Way – 18th Street

720 Elm Avenue

S 6th St & Virginia Ave

Scope of Work

Create the new Unity Park in the City of Richmond through the acquisition of .46 acres and the development of 7.54 acres. Construct a new

Expand Elm Playlot through acquisition of a .06 acre parcel and substantially improve the existing park in the City of Richmond. Conversion of an existing single-family residence into new

Expanded Play/fitness area, expanded plaza area with picnic tables and barbeque areas, new restroom facility, bike racks, and repair of landscape and irrigation to the new work.

Scope of

Work...cont.

community plaza, children’s play area, gazebo, "great lawn” open space area, community garden, gateways and public art, biking and walking paths, restroom, lighting and landscaping.

community center, global village, tot lot with water feature, trike/walk path, zip line, and picnic areas.

Funding Sources

Prop 84 State Parks Grant – $5.0 million

Prop 84 State Parks Grant – $1,944,634

HCD Housing Related Parks Grant - $417,000

4/12/2012 6/30/2016

4/30/2011-6/30/2014

10/31/2017-6/30/2019

Total Cost Start Date, and Date of Completion

2. Provide an operation and maintenance budget breakdown (chart) showing the monthly and annual total expected cost to operate and maintain this proposed PROJECT (include utilities, routine repairs/upkeep, and staffing costs in the chart). The City anticipates that Harbour-8th will operate similarly to how the Elm Playlot does. The City will contract with Pogo Park to provide programming assistance at the Park. The City anticipates generating revenues to support the operation and maintenance budget attached here from a variety of sources as noted below. 3. What are the planned funding sources to operate and maintain the proposed PROJECT?

General Fund Kids First (Measure E) Funds Foundation Funding Rental Revenues

4. Provide the weblink for a list of PARKS and facilities the APPLICANT currently oversees. If a website is not available, please provide the list in this response. OGALS may visit some of the APPLICANT’S PARKS to review the level of ongoing operation and maintenance. http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/2075/Parks-Public-Facilities

HARBOUR-8 PARK EXPANSION OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET Description

Monthly Cost

Annual Cost

Program Staff - Pogo Park

$10,000

$120,000

$4,400

$52,800

Utilities - City of Richmond

$300

$3,600

Repair & Maintenance - City of Richmond

$100

$1,200

Maintenance Staff - City of Richmond

Insurance - City of Richmond

TOTAL

$177,600

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ASSESSOR’S PARCEL MAP CITY OF RICHMOND RICHMOND GREENWAY BETWEEN HARBOUR WAY AND 8TH STREET

538-420-030

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ASSESSOR’S PARCEL MAP PARCEL TO BE ACQUIRED:

538-420-001

California Program P.O. Box 5326 Larkspur, CA 94977

July 26, 2019 California Department of Parks and Recreation Office of Grants and Local Services P.O. Box 942896 Sacramento, CA 94296-0001 Harbour - 8 Park Expansion Project – Willing Seller Letter To Whom It May Concern: The Conservation Fund is the owner of property in Richmond, California, commonly known as 909 Ohio Avenue and more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto (“909 Property”). We are aware of, and wholeheartedly support, the City of Richmond’s application to the Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program seeking a grant to expand and enhance Harbour8 Park (“Grant”), including that portion of the 909 Property indicated on Exhibit A (“Proposed Site”). The Proposed Site has an estimated fair market value of $310,000 (“Appraised Price”) as evidenced by an appraisal prepared by Yovino Young Incorporated. Should the City receive the Grant, this letter confirms The Conservation Fund’s willingness to negotiate the terms of sale of the Proposed Site to the City for a price not more than the Appraised Price. Sincerely,

Chris Kelly The Conservation Fund

National Office 1655 North Fort Myer Drive, Suite 1300 Arlington, CA 22209 www.conservationfund.org

EXHIBIT A

H A R B O U R - 8 PA R K E X PA N S I O N P R O J E C T City of Richmond

x x

CITY OF RICHMOND HARBOUR-8 PARK EXPANSION PROJECT

VIA Atelier, Inc. Civil Engineering - Consulting

CONCEPT LEVEL SITE PLAN

L-1

Existing footprint of Harbour-8 Park located on a two block section of the Richmond Greenway between Harbour Way & 8th Street

PROJECT SITE PHOTOS HARBOUR-8 PARK EXPANSION 9 th

Harbour Way

8 th

10,700 square feet property located at 909 Ohio Ave would expand park footprint and provide critical public ac access at 9th St. and Ohio Ave.

Ohio Ave

Using a Housing-Related Parks Program grant, the City contracted with Pogo Park to design, permit, build, and install four new recreation features as part of the “Harbour-8 Improvement Project.” Pogo Park and its Community Team designed and built a metal archway (shown above) at the Harbour Way entrance, built a double-sided, 100 foot brick wall, by hand, a small Community Plaza, and a Rain Garden. The entire process took only six months, record time – and is proof that the City of Richmond/Pogo Park partnership can “get it done!” Photo taken 8/1/19.

8th Street entrance to Harbour Way. The Community envisions replicating the entry gateway they built and installed in June 2019 at the park entrance at Harbour Way. That entry gateway (shown above) features a 3-foot, hand-built, brick wall and a railroad-themed metal archway that celebrates Richmond’s railroad history. Photo taken 8/1/19.

Photos above and below show where the community wants to locate the BBQ/Picnic area, just to the left of the entrance to Harbour-8 Park at 8th Street. Photos taken 8/1/19.

Photos above and below show where the community wants to locate the Zip Line Area, just to the right of the 8th Street entryway to the park. Photos taken 8/1/19.

Community residents want to bend this asphalt bike/walk path to the left to make more room in the heart of the park for a large Children’s Play Area.

Pogo Park’s Community Team and key partners designed, built and install a Community Plaza (above) and Rain Garden (above right) to mark the entrance to Harbour-8 Park at Harbour Way.

This is the expansion property to acquire at 909 Ohio. Community residents want to remove the fence that separates this private land from the public parkland on the other side of the fence, and build a custom-made, unique Children’s Play Area in the center.

Acquiring the property at 909 Ohio would provide critical park access to residents from 9th Street and Ohio (above). Currently, residents walking north on 9th Street are blocked from accessing the Richmond Greenway and are forced to brave dangerous conditions (see the fenced-off sidewalk with no lighting and broken sidewalks) to access the park.

COMMUNITY BASED PLANNING PHOTOS HARBOUR-8 PARK EXPANSION

Pogo Park’s Community Outreach Team (COT) meets onsite in Jan. 2019 to devise a strategy to engage with other residents to create a communitydriven vision concept site plan for Harbour-8 Park.

COT member Tonie Lee gets input from the AC Transit bus driver!

COT members met at Pogo Park’s Harbour-8 oﬃce to work as a group to collectively envistion what was possible.

To begin to dream and reimagine how Harbour-8 could be developed, COT members decided to build a 1/4” scale model of their preliminary vision. Here are photos of COT members in action. Photos on this page taken in Jan. 2019

A photo taken of the COT’s team handbuilt scale model for Harbour-8 Park.

After working together to design and build the 1/4” scale model, Pogo Park’s COT set up a Pop-Up tent at Harbour-8 Park in January to engage community members to get input on the current iteration of design ideas for Harbour-8 Park – and to solicit new ideas. Photo taken January 2019.

Community residents met often with City staﬀ and design professionals onsite to discuss the feasibility of building certain recreational features at Harbour-8 Park. Photo taken January 2019.

Community residents want to see public art at Harbour-8 Park that reflects Richmond’s long history shaped and defined by railroads. COT’s James Anderson researched historical information about trains, created his own scale model of a model of a train that could be installed on Harbour-8 Park’s Entry Gateways. The COT installed James’ model on MLK Day on the Greenway, January 21, the largest volunteer day in Richmond. MLK Day drew over 300 people to experience the COT’s full-scale model for Harbour-8 Park, onsite, – and provide feedback. Photo taken January 2019.

The COT worked iteratively together over mutiple days to create this basic vision for how to build on James’ vision and “bling” out the archways at the entrance to Harbour-8 Park at Harbour Way and 8th Street. Photo taken January 2019.

COT members Juan Ramirez and Tonie Lee create the next iterative design for Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project. Photo taken May 2019.

Everyone knows COT member Carmen Lee has a special gift for designing public space. She was the one to articulate a vision that tied everyone’s ideas together. Photo taken January 2019.

COT members meet with City staﬀ, landscape architects, civil engineers, and Scientific Art Studio to discuss how to move the Community’s vision to the next level. Photo taken May 2019.

COT members created a 10 foot model of Harbour-8 Park to use in subsequent outreach with the community. Photo taken May 2019.

COT members set up the Community Outreach Tents at Harbour-8 Park over multiple days. Residents could identify, select, and locate desired recreation features – and provide input about how to make Harbour-8 Park safe and beautiful. Photos taken June 2019.

PROJECT LOCATION MAP

Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project Address:

Richmond Greenway Between Harbour Way and 8th Street Richmond, CA 94804

Richmond Greenway

HARBOUR-8 PARK Richmond Greenway

California Conservation Corps and Certified Community Conservation Corps Proposition 68 – Parks, Environment and Water Bond Corps Consultation Review Document Except for an exempted project, this Corps Consultation Review Document shall be completed by California Conservation Corps and Certified Community Conservation Corps (hereafter collectively referred to as Corps) staff and must accompany applications for funding through Proposition 68, Chapter 1, Division 45: California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access for All Act of 2018. Please see the Corps Consultation Process, starting with Step 1 on Page 1 of this attachment. Applications that do not include this document demonstrating that both Corps have been consulted will not be given preference for receipt of a grant. All Implementation projects require Corps consultation. Applicants for all Proposition 68 Planning or Scientific Studies projects must consult with both Corps if the project includes any field work (including but not limited to baseline studies, invasive plant removal, native plant propagation, mapping, and site maintenance). Only projects without field work are exempt from the consultation process and do not need to submit the Corps Consultation Form to Funding Entities. 1. Name of Applicant: City of Richmond Project Title: Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project Department/Conservancy to which you are applying for funding: CA Dept of Parks and Recreation – SPP To be completed by Corps: This Consultation Review Document is being prepared by:  The California Conservation Corps (CCC)  California Association of Local Conservation Corps (CALCC) 2. Applicant has submitted the required information by email to the California Conservation Corps (CCC) and California Association of Local Conservation Corps (CALCC):

 Yes (applicant has submitted all necessary information to CCC)  No (applicant has not submitted all information or did not submit information to both Corps – application is deemed non-compliant)

3. After consulting with the project applicant, the CCC and CALCC has determined the following:

 It is NOT feasible for CCC services to be used on the project (deemed compliant)  It is feasible for the CCC and/or certified community conservation corps services to be used on the project and the following aspects of the project can be accomplished with Corps services (deemed compliant):

CCC and CALCC Representatives will return this form as documentation of consultation to applicant via email within five (5) business days of receipt as verification of consultation. Applicant will include a copy of this document as part of the project application. If the Corps determine it is feasible to use their services on the project, applicant will coordinate with the Corps to develop estimated costs for those services for inclusion in the budget. The Corps must be consulted each grant cycle prior to application. If past consultations are submitted, the requirement is not met.

California Conservation Corps and Certified Community Conservation Corps Proposition 68 – Parks, Environment and Water Bond Corps Consultation Review Document Except for an exempted project, this Corps Consultation Review Document shall be completed by California Conservation Corps and Certified Community Conservation Corps (hereafter collectively referred to as Corps) staff and must accompany applications for funding through Proposition 68, Chapter 1, Division 45: California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access for All Act of 2018. Please see the Corps Consultation Process, starting with Step 1 on Page 1 of this attachment. Applications that do not include this document demonstrating that both Corps have been consulted will not be given preference for receipt of a grant. All Implementation projects require Corps consultation. Applicants for all Proposition 68 Planning or Scientific Studies projects must consult with both Corps if the project includes any field work (including but not limited to baseline studies, invasive plant removal, native plant propagation, mapping, and site maintenance). Only projects without field work are exempt from the consultation process and do not need to submit the Corps Consultation Form to Funding Entities. 1. Name of Applicant: City of Richmond Project Title: Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project Department/Conservancy to which you are applying for funding: California Department of Parks and Recreation, Office of Grants and Local Services This Consultation Review Document is being prepared by:  The California Conservation Corps (CCC)  The California Association of Local Conservation Corps (CALCC) 2. Applicant has submitted the required information by email to the California Conservation Corps (CCC) and California Association of Local Conservation Corps (CALCC):

 Yes (applicant has submitted all necessary information to the CCC and CALCC)  No (applicant has not submitted all information or did not submit information to both Corps – application is deemed non-compliant)

3. After consulting with the project applicant, the CCC and CALCC has determined the following:  It is NOT feasible for CCC and/or certified community conservation corps services to be used on the project (deemed compliant)  It is feasible for the CCC and/or certified community conservation corps services to be used on the project and the following aspects of the project can be accomplished with Corps services (deemed compliant): CCC and CALCC Representatives will return this form as documentation of consultation to applicant via email within five (5) business days of receipt as verification of consultation. Applicant will include a copy of this document as part of the project application. If the Corps determine it is feasible to use their services on the project, applicant will coordinate with the Corps to develop estimated costs for those services for inclusion in the budget. The Corps must be consulted each grant cycle prior to application. If past consultations are submitted, the requirement is not met.

FUNDING SOURCES 2020 Pledged

2020 Pending

FOUNDATIONS The California Endowment East Bay Community Foundation Resource Legacy Fund San Francisco Foundation Kaiser Permanente Dean & Margaret Lesher Foundation Sunlight Giving Foundation Hellman Foundation Mechanics Bank Other Foundations TOTAL FOUNDATIONS DONATIONS Business Individual TOTAL DONATIONS EARNED INCOME City of Richmond - design contract The Conservation Fund MIG - Yellow Brick Road design contract City of Richmond - Yellow Brick Road contract TOTAL EARNED INCOME

TOTAL

$125,000 $20,000 $25,000 $35,000 $25,000 $25,000 $50,000 $25,000

$220,000

$5,000 $50,000 $165,000

$10,000 $100,000 $110,000

$1,400,000 $30,000 $21,000 $4,000 $1,455,000

$50,000 $50,000

$1,675,000

$325,000

SITE OF HARBOUR-8 PARK EXPANSION PROJECT

RICHMOND CALIFORNIA

Location of Harbour-8 Park

April 15, 2020 Julie Turrini Resource Legacy Fund 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 1095 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Ms. Turrini, My name is Denise Yamamoto and I am President of Pogo Park’s Board of Directors. As you know, Pogo Park is poised to secure a design contract from the City of Richmond to organize, lead, and manage the effort to produce a design and construction documents for the Harbour-8 Expansion Project. The City’s contract with Pogo Park is a reimbursable contract – meaning that Pogo Park must do the work, expend funds up front for labor and materials – and then wait for reimbursement. Pogo Park’s Board of Directors supports our Executive Director Toody Maher’s efforts to obtain a $600,000 accounts receivable loan to do this important project. On behalf of everyone on the Board, I thank you for assisting Toody in these efforts. Please know that Pogo Park’s board is comprised of members who are well-versed in finance: our Treasurer, Hank Levy is a CPA and is also the Treasurer of Alameda County. Other board members are MBA’s or business owners. We review Pogo Park’s finances on a regular basis and are confident in our ability to manage an accounts receivable loan and to re-pay the loan on time. Please contact me directly if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely,

Denise Yamamoto Board President 510-459-3019 mobile denise@yonger.net

" " ! #

pogopark.org

Pogo Park PROFIT AND LOSS January - December 2019

TOTAL

Income 4000 Grants

386,477.70

4100 Donations

162,963.78

4103 Board Donations

171,820.00

4500 Earned Income

992,153.33

4900 Release of Temp. Restricted

0.00

Total Income

$1,713,414.81

Cost of Goods Sold 2500 COGS

440,096.85

Cost of Goods Sold (deleted-3)

235.85

Total Cost of Goods Sold

$440,332.70

GROSS PROFIT

$1,273,082.11

Expenses 6000 Personnel

985,571.54

7000 Non-Personnel

220,795.74

QB07 Unapplied Cash Bill Payment Expense Total Expenses

0.00 $1,206,367.28

NET OPERATING INCOME

$66,714.83

Other Income 8000 Interest Income

200.17

8010 Unrealized Gain/Loss on Investments

-18.80

Total Other Income

$181.37

NET OTHER INCOME

$181.37

NET INCOME

$66,896.20

Cash Basis Tuesday, April 21, 2020 10:55 AM GMT-07:00

1/1

Pogo Park BALANCE SHEET As of December 31, 2019

TOTAL

ASSETS Current Assets Bank Accounts 1000 Checking Accounts

55,430.60

1050 Savings | Investment Accounts

370,834.43

1100 Online Fundraising Accounts

15,162.98

Total Bank Accounts

$441,428.01

Other Current Assets 1300 Petty Cash

982.65

1350 Reimbursable Expenses

0.00

1400 Prepaid Expenses

17,672.71

1899 Undeposited Funds

0.00

Total Other Current Assets

$18,655.36

Total Current Assets

$460,083.37

Fixed Assets 1900 Fixed Assets (over $1,000)

17,485.56

Total Fixed Assets

$17,485.56

TOTAL ASSETS

$477,568.93

LIABILITIES AND EQUITY Liabilities Current Liabilities Accounts Payable 2000 Accounts Payable

1,569.50

Total Accounts Payable

$1,569.50

Credit Cards 2100 Credit Cards

3,423.20

Total Credit Cards

$3,423.20

Other Current Liabilities 2200 Payroll Liability

-4,214.44

2300 Employee Reimbursements Payable 2400 Line of Credit

74.55 0.00

2600 Loan from Packard Foundation

352,245.83

2800 Fiscal Sponsorship

0.00

2950 Sales Tax Payable

0.00

2999 Overpaid Grant

0.00

Total Other Current Liabilities

$348,105.94

Total Current Liabilities

$353,098.64

Total Liabilities

$353,098.64

Cash Basis Tuesday, April 21, 2020 10:56 AM GMT-07:00

1/2

Pogo Park BALANCE SHEET As of December 31, 2019

TOTAL

Equity 3800 Temp. Restricted Net Assets

0.00

3900 Unrestricted Net Assets

57,574.09

QB08 Opening Balance Equity

0.00

Net Income

66,896.20

Total Equity

$124,470.29

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY

$477,568.93

Cash Basis Tuesday, April 21, 2020 10:56 AM GMT-07:00

2/2

Pogo Park PROFIT AND LOSS January 1 - April 21, 2020

TOTAL

Income 4000 Grants

40,000.00

4100 Donations

14,739.78

4103 Board Donations

210.00

4500 Earned Income

126,437.01

4700 SBA Emergency Funding

10,000.00

Total Income

$191,386.79

Cost of Goods Sold 2500 COGS

86,368.35

Total Cost of Goods Sold

$86,368.35

GROSS PROFIT

$105,018.44

Expenses 6000 Personnel

235,645.40

7000 Non-Personnel

44,631.28

QB07 Unapplied Cash Bill Payment Expense Total Expenses

200.36 $280,477.04

NET OPERATING INCOME

$ -175,458.60

Other Income 8000 Interest Income

21.56

8010 Unrealized Gain/Loss on Investments Total Other Income

-1,464.52 $ -1,442.96

Other Expenses QB10 Reconciliation Discrepancies

-0.34

Total Other Expenses

$ -0.34

NET OTHER INCOME

$ -1,442.62

NET INCOME

$ -176,901.22

Cash Basis Tuesday, April 21, 2020 11:00 AM GMT-07:00

1/1

Pogo Park BALANCE SHEET As of April 21, 2020

TOTAL

ASSETS Current Assets Bank Accounts 1000 Checking Accounts

13,699.55

1050 Savings | Investment Accounts

161,993.41

1100 Online Fundraising Accounts

169.67

Total Bank Accounts

$175,862.63

Other Current Assets 1300 Petty Cash

307.65

1350 Reimbursable Expenses

0.00

1400 Prepaid Expenses

88.84

1899 Undeposited Funds

0.00

Total Other Current Assets

$396.49

Total Current Assets

$176,259.12

Fixed Assets 1900 Fixed Assets (over $1,000)

21,485.56

Total Fixed Assets

$21,485.56

TOTAL ASSETS

$197,744.68

LIABILITIES AND EQUITY Liabilities Current Liabilities Accounts Payable 2000 Accounts Payable

1,569.50

Total Accounts Payable

$1,569.50

Credit Cards 2100 Credit Cards

7,272.37

Total Credit Cards

$7,272.37

Other Current Liabilities 2200 Payroll Liability

-839.75

2300 Employee Reimbursements Payable

54.83

2400 Line of Credit

40,000.00

2401 Line of Credit-7257

50,040.00

2600 Loan from Packard Foundation

152,493.06

2800 Fiscal Sponsorship

0.00

2950 Sales Tax Payable

-414.40

2999 Overpaid Grant

0.00

Total Other Current Liabilities

$241,333.74

Total Current Liabilities

$250,175.61

Total Liabilities

$250,175.61

Cash Basis Tuesday, April 21, 2020 11:01 AM GMT-07:00

1/2

Pogo Park BALANCE SHEET As of April 21, 2020

TOTAL

Equity 3800 Temp. Restricted Net Assets

0.00

3900 Unrestricted Net Assets

124,470.29

QB08 Opening Balance Equity

0.00

Net Income

-176,901.22

Total Equity

$ -52,430.93

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY

$197,744.68

Cash Basis Tuesday, April 21, 2020 11:01 AM GMT-07:00

2/2

POGO PARK ORGANIZATIONAL BUDGET – 2020 INCOME Grants Donations Earned Income GROSS INCOME

$500,000 $150,000 $1,097,000 $1,747,000

29% 9% 63%

COGS Payments to Contractors Cost of Materials/Supplies

($991,400) ($50,000)

-109% -7%

GROSS MARGIN

$705,600

100%

EXPENSE Personnel Salaries | Wages Payroll Tax & Fringe Benefits Payroll Processing Fees Contractors Total Personnel

$370,263 $96,268 $2,600 $249,280 $718,411

41% 11% 0% 27% 79%

Non-Personnel Business Office Occupancy Business Office Costs Program Supplies Fundraising Meeting and Conferences Relationship Development Travel Insurance Printing Membership & Dues Licenses & Fees Bank Fees Interest Expense Total Non-Personnel

$65,126 $18,800 $46,400 $13,500 $13,500 $4,900 $6,000 $18,744 $2,500 $385 $70 $250 $4,500 $194,675

7% 2% 5% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 21%

Total Expense

$913,086

100%

-$207,486

-29%

NET INCOME / (LOSS)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

990

Form

Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax

Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service

A For the 2018 calendar year, or tax year beginning B Check if applicable: C Name of organization

, and ending D Employer identification number

Name change

Doing business as Number and street (or P.O. box if mail is not delivered to street address)

Initial return Final return/ terminated

City or town, state or province, country, and ZIP or foreign postal code

RICHMOND

CA 94804-1623

H(a) Is this a group return for subordinates?

Yes

H(b) Are all subordinates included?

Yes

Revenue Expenses

No No

If "No," attach a list. (see instructions) 527 H(c) Group exemption number  L

Year of formation:

2010

M State of legal domicile:

..........................................................................

POGO PARK TRANSFORMS DISPIRITED CITY PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS INTO SAFE, AND MAGICAL OUTDOOR PUBLIC SPACES FOR CHILDREN TO PLAY AND FOR THE . . .HEALTHY, .................................................................................................................................................... TO GATHER. SEE SCHEDULE O. . . .COMMUNITY ....................................................................................................................................................

. ......................................................................................................................................................

if the organization discontinued its operations or disposed of more than 25% of its net assets. 2 Check this box  3 3 Number of voting members of the governing body (Part VI, line 1a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4 Number of independent voting members of the governing body (Part VI, line 1b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5 Total number of individuals employed in calendar year 2018 (Part V, line 2a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6 Total number of volunteers (estimate if necessary) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7a 7a Total unrelated business revenue from Part VIII, column (C), line 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7b b Net unrelated business taxable income from Form 990-T, line 38 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

8 7 17 150

Prior Year

Net Assets or Fund Balances

Summary

1 Briefly describe the organization's mission or most significant activities: Activities & Governance

845,130

G Gross receipts$

TOODY MAHER 2604 ROOSEVELT AVENUE RICHMOND CA 94804 X 501(c)(3) 501(c) ( )  (insert no.) 4947(a)(1) or Tax-exempt status: WWW.POGOPARK.ORG Website:  Form of organization: X Corporation Trust Association Other 

Part I

E Telephone number

F Name and address of principal officer:

Application pending

32-0318691 510-215-5500

Room/suite

2604 ROOSEVELT AVENUE

Amended return

2018

Open to Public Inspection

POGO PARK

Address change

OMB No. 1545-0047

Under section 501(c), 527, or 4947(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code (except private foundations)  Do not enter social security numbers on this form as it may be made public.  Go to www.irs.gov/Form990 for instructions and the latest information.

8 Contributions and grants (Part VIII, line 1h) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Program service revenue (Part VIII, line 2g) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Investment income (Part VIII, column (A), lines 3, 4, and 7d) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Other revenue (Part VIII, column (A), lines 5, 6d, 8c, 9c, 10c, and 11e) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Total revenue – add lines 8 through 11 (must equal Part VIII, column (A), line 12) . . . . . . . 13 Grants and similar amounts paid (Part IX, column (A), lines 1–3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Benefits paid to or for members (Part IX, column (A), line 4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Salaries, other compensation, employee benefits (Part IX, column (A), lines 5–10) . . . . . . . 16a Professional fundraising fees (Part IX, column (A), line 11e) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b Total fundraising expenses (Part IX, column (D), line 25)  . . . . . . . . . .120,048 ..................... 17 Other expenses (Part IX, column (A), lines 11a–11d, 11f–24e) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Total expenses. Add lines 13–17 (must equal Part IX, column (A), line 25) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Revenue less expenses. Subtract line 18 from line 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

773,262 3,200 684 67,984 845,130 0 0 445,357 0

552,164 757,604 1,309,768 100,179

584,065 1,029,422 -184,292

251,621 6,304 245,317

70,789 9,764 61,025

Beginning of Current Year

20 Total assets (Part X, line 16) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Total liabilities (Part X, line 26) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Net assets or fund balances. Subtract line 21 from line 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Part II

Current Year

1,340,703 16,091 115 53,038 1,409,947

0 0

End of Year

Signature Block

Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have examined this return, including accompanying schedules and statements, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, it is true, correct, and complete. Declaration of preparer (other than officer) is based on all information of which preparer has any knowledge.

Sign Here

Signature of officer

Date

TOODY MAHER

SECRETARY

Type or print name and title Print/Type preparer's name

Paid BETH ATTEBERY Preparer Firm's name  Use Only Firm's address



Preparer's signature

BETH ATTEBERY

THE HENRY LEVY GROUP 5940 COLLEGE AVE STE F OAKLAND, CA 94618-1385

May the IRS discuss this return with the preparer shown above? (see instructions) For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the separate instructions.

DAA

Date

Check

02/18/20

self-employed

Firm's EIN 

Phone no.

PTIN

P01466121

94-3194056 510-652-1000

.....................................................

Yes Form

990 (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Form 990 (2018)

Part III 1

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Statement of Program Service Accomplishments Check if Schedule O contains a response or note to any line in this Part III

Page

.......................................

Briefly describe the organization's mission:

POGO . . . . . . . . PARK . . . . . . . . . . . TRANSFORMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DISPIRITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CITY . . . . . . . . . . . PARKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . AND . . . . . . . . .PLAYGROUNDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . INTO . . . . . . . . . . .SAFE, .................. HEALTHY, AND MAGICAL OUTDOOR PUBLIC SPACES FOR CHILDREN TO PLAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .AND . . . . . . . . .FOR . . . . . . . . THE . COMMUNITY TO GATHER. SEE SCHEDULE O. . .......................................................................................................................................................... 2

Did the organization undertake any significant program services during the year which were not listed on the prior Form 990 or 990-EZ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If "Yes," describe these new services on Schedule O. Did the organization cease conducting, or make significant changes in how it conducts, any program services? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If "Yes," describe these changes on Schedule O. Describe the organization's program service accomplishments for each of its three largest program services, as measured by expenses. Section 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations are required to report the amount of grants and allocations to others, the total expenses, and revenue, if any, for each program service reported.

Yes

) (Expenses $ . . . . . . . . . . . . .91,630 ) (Revenue $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ) ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . including grants of$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TO. . . .HIRE, TRAIN, AND EMPOWER LOCAL RESIDENTS LIVING IN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . INNER-CITY ........................................ NEIGHBORHOODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(MANY . . . . . . . . . . . . . OF . . . . . . .WHOM . . . . . . . . . . .ARE . . . . . . . . UNEMPLOYED, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IDLE, . . . . . . . . . . . . . .AND . . . . . . . . MARGINALIZED) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .TO . . . . . . BE ... FULL PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROCESS OF DESIGNING, BUILDING, AND THEN . .......................................................................................................................................................... TRANSFORMING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CITY . . . . . . . . . . .PARKS . . . . . . . . . . . . .IN . . . . . . THEIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMMUNITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .INTO . . . . . . . . . . .VIBRANT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .HUBS . . . . . . . . . . .OF . . . . . . COMMUNITY .............. LIFE. . ..........................................................................................................................................................

4a (Code:

. .......................................................................................................................................................... . .......................................................................................................................................................... . .......................................................................................................................................................... . .......................................................................................................................................................... . .......................................................................................................................................................... . ..........................................................................................................................................................

) (Expenses $ . . . . . . . . . . . . .81,725 ) (Revenue $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ) ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . including grants of $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . POGO PARK HIRES AND TRAINS LOCAL RESIDENTS TO BECOME . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ."PLAYWORKERS" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .WHO ........... LEARN HOW TO USE ENRICHED PLAY AS A VEHICLE TO DEVELOP . ....................................................................................................................A . . . . .CHILD'S ................................. LINGUISTIC, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SOCIAL, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COGNITIVE, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PHYSICAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .AND . . . . . . . . CREATIVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SKILLS. ..........................................

4b (Code:

) (Expenses $ . . . . . . . . . . .370,840 ) (Revenue $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ) ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . including grants of$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EMPLOYED A TEAM OF LOCAL RESIDENTS WHO LIVE IN RICHMOND'S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IRON . . . . . . . . . . .TRIANGLE .................... NEIGHBORHOOD ONE OF CALIFORNIA'S MOST IMPOVERISHED, VIOLENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .AND . . . . . . . . UNDER.............. SERVED . . . . . . . . . . . . .COMMUNITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . TO . . . . . . .DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AND . . . . . . . . .RE-BUILD ...................A . . . . .CITY . . . . . . . . . . .PARK . . . . . . . . . . .AND . . . . . . . . PLAYGROUND. ...........................

4c (Code:

4d Other program services (Describe in Schedule O.) (Expenses $ 229,470 including grants of$ 4e Total program service expenses  773,665 DAA

) (Revenue $

3,200

) Form

990 (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Form 990 (2018)

Part IV

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Page

Checklist of Required Schedules Yes No

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 8 9

10 11 a b c d e f 12a b 13 14a b

15 16 17 18 19 20a b 21

Is the organization described in section 501(c)(3) or 4947(a)(1) (other than a private foundation)? If “Yes,” complete Schedule A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Is the organization required to complete Schedule B, Schedule of Contributors (see instructions)? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization engage in direct or indirect political campaign activities on behalf of or in opposition to candidates for public office? If “Yes,” complete Schedule C, Part I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section 501(c)(3) organizations. Did the organization engage in lobbying activities, or have a section 501(h) election in effect during the tax year? If "Yes," complete Schedule C, Part II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Is the organization a section 501(c)(4), 501(c)(5), or 501(c)(6) organization that receives membership dues, assessments, or similar amounts as defined in Revenue Procedure 98-19? If "Yes," complete Schedule C, Part III . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization maintain any donor advised funds or any similar funds or accounts for which donors have the right to provide advice on the distribution or investment of amounts in such funds or accounts? If “Yes,” complete Schedule D, Part I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization receive or hold a conservation easement, including easements to preserve open space, the environment, historic land areas, or historic structures? If “Yes,” complete Schedule D, Part II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization maintain collections of works of art, historical treasures, or other similar assets? If “Yes,” complete Schedule D, Part III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization report an amount in Part X, line 21, for escrow or custodial account liability, serve as a custodian for amounts not listed in Part X; or provide credit counseling, debt management, credit repair, or debt negotiation services? If “Yes,” complete Schedule D, Part IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization, directly or through a related organization, hold assets in temporarily restricted endowments, permanent endowments, or quasi-endowments? If “Yes,” complete Schedule D, Part V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If the organization's answer to any of the following questions is “Yes,” then complete Schedule D, Parts VI, VII, VIII, IX, or X as applicable. Did the organization report an amount for land, buildings, and equipment in Part X, line 10? If "Yes," complete Schedule D, Part VI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization report an amount for investments—other securities in Part X, line 12 that is 5% or more of its total assets reported in Part X, line 16? If "Yes," complete Schedule D, Part VII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization report an amount for investments—program related in Part X, line 13 that is 5% or more of its total assets reported in Part X, line 16? If "Yes," complete Schedule D, Part VIII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization report an amount for other assets in Part X, line 15 that is 5% or more of its total assets reported in Part X, line 16? If "Yes," complete Schedule D, Part IX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization report an amount for other liabilities in Part X, line 25? If "Yes," complete Schedule D, Part X . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization's separate or consolidated financial statements for the tax year include a footnote that addresses the organization's liability for uncertain tax positions under FIN 48 (ASC 740)? If "Yes," complete Schedule D, Part X . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization obtain separate, independent audited financial statements for the tax year? If “Yes,” complete Schedule D, Parts XI and XII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Was the organization included in consolidated, independent audited financial statements for the tax year? If "Yes," and if the organization answered "No" to line 12a, then completing Schedule D, Parts XI and XII is optional . . . . . . . . . . . . . Is the organization a school described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii)? If “Yes,” complete Schedule E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization maintain an office, employees, or agents outside of the United States? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization have aggregate revenues or expenses of more than $10,000 from grantmaking, fundraising, business, investment, and program service activities outside the United States, or aggregate foreign investments valued at $100,000 or more? If “Yes,” complete Schedule F, Parts I and IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization report on Part IX, column (A), line 3, more than $5,000 of grants or other assistance to or for any foreign organization? If “Yes,” complete Schedule F, Parts II and IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization report on Part IX, column (A), line 3, more than $5,000 of aggregate grants or other assistance to or for foreign individuals? If “Yes,” complete Schedule F, Parts III and IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization report a total of more than $15,000 of expenses for professional fundraising services on Part IX, column (A), lines 6 and 11e? If “Yes,” complete Schedule G, Part I (see instructions) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization report more than $15,000 total of fundraising event gross income and contributions on Part VIII, lines 1c and 8a? If "Yes," complete Schedule G, Part II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization report more than $15,000 of gross income from gaming activities on Part VIII, line 9a? If "Yes," complete Schedule G, Part III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization operate one or more hospital facilities? If “Yes,” complete Schedule H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If “Yes” to line 20a, did the organization attach a copy of its audited financial statements to this return? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization report more than $5,000 of grants or other assistance to any domestic organization or domestic government on Part IX, column (A), line 1? If “Yes,” complete Schedule I, Parts I and II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 2 3

11a

11b

11c

11d 11e

X X

11f

12a

12b 13 14a

X X X

14b

19 20a 20b

X X

21 Form

DAA

X X

X 990 (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Form 990 (2018)

Part IV

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Page Yes

22 23

24a

b c d 25a b

28 a b c 29 30 31 32 33 34 35a b 36 37 38

Did the organization report more than $5,000 of grants or other assistance to or for domestic individuals on Part IX, column (A), line 2? If “Yes,” complete Schedule I, Parts I and III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization answer “Yes” to Part VII, Section A, line 3, 4, or 5 about compensation of the organization's current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, and highest compensated employees? If "Yes," complete Schedule J . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization have a tax-exempt bond issue with an outstanding principal amount of more than $100,000 as of the last day of the year, that was issued after December 31, 2002? If “Yes,” answer lines 24b through 24d and complete Schedule K. If “No,” go to line 25a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization invest any proceeds of tax-exempt bonds beyond a temporary period exception? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization maintain an escrow account other than a refunding escrow at any time during the year to defease any tax-exempt bonds? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization act as an “on behalf of” issuer for bonds outstanding at any time during the year? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section 501(c)(3), 501(c)(4), and 501(c)(29) organizations. Did the organization engage in an excess benefit transaction with a disqualified person during the year? If “Yes,” complete Schedule L, Part I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Is the organization aware that it engaged in an excess benefit transaction with a disqualified person in a prior year, and that the transaction has not been reported on any of the organization's prior Forms 990 or 990-EZ? If "Yes," complete Schedule L, Part I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization report any amount on Part X, line 5, 6, or 22 for receivables from or payables to any current or former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, highest compensated employees, or disqualified persons? If "Yes," complete Schedule L, Part II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization provide a grant or other assistance to an officer, director, trustee, key employee, substantial contributor or employee thereof, a grant selection committee member, or to a 35% controlled entity or family member of any of these persons? If “Yes,” complete Schedule L, Part III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Was the organization a party to a business transaction with one of the following parties (see Schedule L, Part IV instructions for applicable filing thresholds, conditions, and exceptions): A current or former officer, director, trustee, or key employee? If "Yes," complete Schedule L, Part IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A family member of a current or former officer, director, trustee, or key employee? If "Yes," complete Schedule L, Part IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An entity of which a current or former officer, director, trustee, or key employee (or a family member thereof) was an officer, director, trustee, or direct or indirect owner? If “Yes,” complete Schedule L, Part IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization receive more than $25,000 in non-cash contributions? If “Yes,” complete Schedule M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization receive contributions of art, historical treasures, or other similar assets, or qualified conservation contributions? If “Yes,” complete Schedule M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization liquidate, terminate, or dissolve and cease operations? If “Yes,” complete Schedule N, Part I . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization sell, exchange, dispose of, or transfer more than 25% of its net assets? If "Yes," complete Schedule N, Part II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization own 100% of an entity disregarded as separate from the organization under Regulations sections 301.7701-2 and 301.7701-3? If “Yes,” complete Schedule R, Part I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Was the organization related to any tax-exempt or taxable entity? If “Yes,” complete Schedule R, Part II, III, or IV, and Part V, line 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization have a controlled entity within the meaning of section 512(b)(13)? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If "Yes" to line 35a, did the organization receive any payment from or engage in any transaction with a controlled entity within the meaning of section 512(b)(13)? If “Yes,” complete Schedule R, Part V, line 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section 501(c)(3) organizations. Did the organization make any transfers to an exempt non-charitable related organization? If “Yes,” complete Schedule R, Part V, line 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization conduct more than 5% of its activities through an entity that is not a related organization and that is treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes? If “Yes,” complete Schedule R, Part VI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization complete Schedule O and provide explanations in Schedule O for Part VI, lines 11b and 19? Note. All Form 990 filers are required to complete Schedule O.

Part V

Checklist of Required Schedules (continued) No

24a 24b

24c 24d 25a

25b

28a

28b

28c 29

X X

30 31

X X

34 35a

X X

35b 36

Statements Regarding Other IRS Filings and Tax Compliance Check if Schedule O contains a response or note to any line in this Part V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

1a Enter the number reported in Box 3 of Form 1096. Enter -0- if not applicable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1a 32 b Enter the number of Forms W-2G included in line 1a. Enter -0- if not applicable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1b 0 c Did the organization comply with backup withholding rules for reportable payments to vendors and reportable gaming (gambling) winnings to prize winners? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1c Form

DAA

X 990 (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Form 990 (2018)

Part V

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Page

Statements Regarding Other IRS Filings and Tax Compliance (continued) Yes No

2a Enter the number of employees reported on Form W-3, Transmittal of Wage and Tax 2a Statements, filed for the calendar year ending with or within the year covered by this return . . . . 17 b If at least one is reported on line 2a, did the organization file all required federal employment tax returns? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Note. If the sum of lines 1a and 2a is greater than 250, you may be required to e-file (see instructions) 3a Did the organization have unrelated business gross income of $1,000 or more during the year? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b If “Yes,” has it filed a Form 990-T for this year? If “No” to line 3b, provide an explanation in Schedule O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4a At any time during the calendar year, did the organization have an interest in, or a signature or other authority over, a financial account in a foreign country (such as a bank account, securities account, or other financial account)? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b If “Yes,” enter the name of the foreign country:  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . See instructions for filing requirements for FinCEN Form 114, Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR). 5a Was the organization a party to a prohibited tax shelter transaction at any time during the tax year? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b Did any taxable party notify the organization that it was or is a party to a prohibited tax shelter transaction? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c If “Yes” to line 5a or 5b, did the organization file Form 8886-T? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6a Does the organization have annual gross receipts that are normally greater than $100,000, and did the organization solicit any contributions that were not tax deductible as charitable contributions? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b If “Yes,” did the organization include with every solicitation an express statement that such contributions or gifts were not tax deductible? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Organizations that may receive deductible contributions under section 170(c). a Did the organization receive a payment in excess of $75 made partly as a contribution and partly for goods and services provided to the payor? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b If “Yes,” did the organization notify the donor of the value of the goods or services provided? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c Did the organization sell, exchange, or otherwise dispose of tangible personal property for which it was required to file Form 8282? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7d d If “Yes,” indicate the number of Forms 8282 filed during the year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e Did the organization receive any funds, directly or indirectly, to pay premiums on a personal benefit contract? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f Did the organization, during the year, pay premiums, directly or indirectly, on a personal benefit contract? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . g If the organization received a contribution of qualified intellectual property, did the organization file Form 8899 as required? . . h If the organization received a contribution of cars, boats, airplanes, or other vehicles, did the organization file a Form 1098-C? 8 Sponsoring organizations maintaining donor advised funds. Did a donor advised fund maintained by the sponsoring organization have excess business holdings at any time during the year? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Sponsoring organizations maintaining donor advised funds. a Did the sponsoring organization make any taxable distributions under section 4966? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b Did the sponsoring organization make a distribution to a donor, donor advisor, or related person? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Section 501(c)(7) organizations. Enter: 10a a Initiation fees and capital contributions included on Part VIII, line 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10b b Gross receipts, included on Form 990, Part VIII, line 12, for public use of club facilities . . . . . . . . . 11 Section 501(c)(12) organizations. Enter: 11a a Gross income from members or shareholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b Gross income from other sources (Do not net amounts due or paid to other sources 11b against amounts due or received from them.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12a Section 4947(a)(1) non-exempt charitable trusts. Is the organization filing Form 990 in lieu of Form 1041? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b If “Yes,” enter the amount of tax-exempt interest received or accrued during the year . . . . . . . . . . 12b 13 Section 501(c)(29) qualified nonprofit health insurance issuers. a Is the organization licensed to issue qualified health plans in more than one state? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Note. See the instructions for additional information the organization must report on Schedule O. b Enter the amount of reserves the organization is required to maintain by the states in which 13b the organization is licensed to issue qualified health plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c Enter the amount of reserves on hand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13c 14a Did the organization receive any payments for indoor tanning services during the tax year? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b If "Yes," has it filed a Form 720 to report these payments? If "No," provide an explanation in Schedule O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Is the organization subject to the section 4960 tax on payment(s) of more than $1,000,000 in remuneration or excess parachute payment(s) during the year? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If "Yes," see instructions and file Form 4720, Schedule N. 16 Is the organization an educational institution subject to the section 4968 excise tax on net investment income? If "Yes," complete Form 4720, Schedule O.

2b 3a 3b

5a 5b 5c

X X

7a 7b

7e 7f 7g 7h

X X

8 9a 9b

12a

13a

14a 14b

Form

DAA

990 (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Form 990 (2018)

Part VI

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Page

Governance, Management, and Disclosure For each "Yes" response to lines 2 through 7b below, and for a "No" response to line 8a, 8b, or 10b below, describe the circumstances, processes, or changes in Schedule O. See instructions. Check if Schedule O contains a response or note to any line in this Part VI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X

Section A. Governing Body and Management Yes No 1a Enter the number of voting members of the governing body at the end of the tax year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 If there are material differences in voting rights among members of the governing body, or if the governing body delegated broad authority to an executive committee or similar committee, explain in Schedule O. 1b b Enter the number of voting members included in line 1a, above, who are independent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2 Did any officer, director, trustee, or key employee have a family relationship or a business relationship with 2 any other officer, director, trustee, or key employee? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Did the organization delegate control over management duties customarily performed by or under the direct 3 supervision of officers, directors, or trustees, or key employees to a management company or other person? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Did the organization make any significant changes to its governing documents since the prior Form 990 was filed? . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5 Did the organization become aware during the year of a significant diversion of the organization’s assets? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Did the organization have members or stockholders? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6 7a Did the organization have members, stockholders, or other persons who had the power to elect or appoint one or more members of the governing body? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7a b Are any governance decisions of the organization reserved to (or subject to approval by) members, stockholders, or persons other than the governing body? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7b Did the organization contemporaneously document the meetings held or written actions undertaken during the year by the following: 8 8a a The governing body? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8b b Each committee with authority to act on behalf of the governing body? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Is there any officer, director, trustee, or key employee listed in Part VII, Section A, who cannot be reached at 9 9 the organization’s mailing address? If “Yes,” provide the names and addresses in Schedule O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1a

X X X X X X X X X X

Section B. Policies (This Section B requests information about policies not required by the Internal Revenue Code.) Yes No 10a Did the organization have local chapters, branches, or affiliates? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b If “Yes,” did the organization have written policies and procedures governing the activities of such chapters, affiliates, and branches to ensure their operations are consistent with the organization's exempt purposes? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11a Has the organization provided a complete copy of this Form 990 to all members of its governing body before filing the form? . b Describe in Schedule O the process, if any, used by the organization to review this Form 990. 12a Did the organization have a written conflict of interest policy? If “No,” go to line 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b Were officers, directors, or trustees, and key employees required to disclose annually interests that could give rise to conflicts? c Did the organization regularly and consistently monitor and enforce compliance with the policy? If “Yes,” describe in Schedule O how this was done . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Did the organization have a written whistleblower policy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Did the organization have a written document retention and destruction policy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Did the process for determining compensation of the following persons include a review and approval by independent persons, comparability data, and contemporaneous substantiation of the deliberation and decision? a The organization’s CEO, Executive Director, or top management official . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b Other officers or key employees of the organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If “Yes” to line 15a or 15b, describe the process in Schedule O (see instructions). 16a Did the organization invest in, contribute assets to, or participate in a joint venture or similar arrangement with a taxable entity during the year? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b If “Yes,” did the organization follow a written policy or procedure requiring the organization to evaluate its participation in joint venture arrangements under applicable federal tax law, and take steps to safeguard the organization’s exempt status with respect to such arrangements?

................................................................

10a

10b 11a

12a 12b

X X

12c 13 14

X X X

15a 15b

X X

16a

16b

Section C. Disclosure 17 18

19 20

List the states with which a copy of this Form 990 is required to be filed  CA ............................................................................ Section 6104 requires an organization to make its Forms 1023 (1024 or 1024-A if applicable), 990, and 990-T (Section 501(c) (3)s only) available for public inspection. Indicate how you made these available. Check all that apply. Own website Another's website X Upon request Other (explain in Schedule O) Describe in Schedule O whether (and if so, how) the organization made its governing documents, conflict of interest policy, and financial statements available to the public during the tax year. State the name, address, and telephone number of the person who possesses the organization's books and records 

SE OWENS & COMPANY OAKLAND DAA

5940 COLLEGE AVENUE

CA 94618

510-423-4300 Form

990 (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

POGO PARK 32-0318691 Page 7 Part VII Compensation of Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, Highest Compensated Employees, and Independent Contractors Check if Schedule O contains a response or note to any line in this Part VII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Form 990 (2018)

Section A. Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, and Highest Compensated Employees 1a Complete this table for all persons required to be listed. Report compensation for the calendar year ending with or within the organization's tax year. List all of the organization's current officers, directors, trustees (whether individuals or organizations), regardless of amount of compensation. Enter -0- in columns (D), (E), and (F) if no compensation was paid. List all of the organization's current key employees, if any. See instructions for definition of "key employee." List the organization's five current highest compensated employees (other than an officer, director, trustee, or key employee) who received reportable compensation (Box 5 of Form W-2 and/or Box 7 of Form 1099-MISC) of more than $100,000 from the organization and any related organizations. List all of the organization's former officers, key employees, and highest compensated employees who received more than $100,000 of reportable compensation from the organization and any related organizations. List all of the organization’s former directors or trustees that received, in the capacity as a former director or trustee of the organization, more than $10,000 of reportable compensation from the organization and any related organizations. List persons in the following order: individual trustees or directors; institutional trustees; officers; key employees; highest compensated employees; and former such persons.

• • • • •

Check this box if neither the organization nor any related organization compensated any current officer, director, or trustee. (A) Name and Title

Highest compensated employee

Key employee

Officer

Institutional trustee

Individual trustee or director

(1) TOODY

(B) Average hours per week (list any hours for related organizations below dotted line)

(D) Reportable compensation from the organization (W-2/1099-MISC)

(E) Reportable compensation from related organizations (W-2/1099-MISC)

(F) Estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations

MAHER 40.00 0.00 X

81,981

0.00 0.00 X

. ....................................................

SECRETARY (2) DENISE

YAMAMOTO

. ....................................................

PRESIDENT (3) HENRY

LEVY

. ....................................................

TREASURER (4) IAN

FRAZER

. ....................................................

DIRECTOR (5) GUS

NEWPORT

. ....................................................

DIRECTOR (6) ALI

NAZAR

. ....................................................

DIRECTOR (7) SHYAAM

SHABAKA

. ....................................................

DIRECTOR (8) JAMI

ZAKEM

. ....................................................

DIRECTOR (9)

. ....................................................

(10) . ....................................................

(11) . .................................................... DAA

Form

990 (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Form 990 (2018) POGO PARK 32-0318691 Section A. Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, and Highest Compensated Employees (continued) Part VII (A) Name and title

Highest compensated employee

Key employee

Officer

Institutional trustee

Individual trustee or director

(B) Average hours per week (list any hours for related organizations below dotted line)

(D) Reportable compensation from the organization (W-2/1099-MISC)

(E) Reportable compensation from related organizations (W-2/1099-MISC)

Page

(F) Estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations

. ....................................................

1b c d 2

Sub-total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  81,981 Total from continuation sheets to Part VII, Section A . . . . . . . .  Total (add lines 1b and 1c) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  81,981 Total number of individuals (including but not limited to those listed above) who received more than $100,000 of reportable compensation from the organization 0

Yes No

Did the organization list any former officer, director, or trustee, key employee, or highest compensated 3 employee on line 1a? If “Yes,” complete Schedule J for such individual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 For any individual listed on line 1a, is the sum of reportable compensation and other compensation from the organization and related organizations greater than $150,000? If “Yes,” complete Schedule J for such 4 individual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Did any person listed on line 1a receive or accrue compensation from any unrelated organization or individual 5 for services rendered to the organization? If “Yes,” complete Schedule J for such person . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section B. Independent Contractors 1 Complete this table for your five highest compensated independent contractors that received more than $100,000 of compensation from the organization. Report compensation for the calendar year ending with or within the organization's tax year. (A)

Name and business address

2 DAA

(B)

X X

(C)

Description of services

Total number of independent contractors (including but not limited to those listed above) who received more than $100,000 of compensation from the organization 

Compensation

0 Form

990 (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Form 990 (2018)

Part VIII

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Statement of Revenue Check if Schedule O contains a response or note to any line in this Part VIII

Gifts, Grants Program Service RevenueContributions, and Other Similar Amounts

(A) Total revenue

1a b c d e f

Federated campaigns . . . . . Membership dues . . . . . . . . . Fundraising events . . . . . . . . Related organizations . . . . . Government grants (contributions) . . All other contributions, gifts, grants, and similar amounts not included above

(B) Related or exempt function revenue

Page

..................................... (C) Unrelated business revenue

(D) Revenue excluded from tax under sections 512-514

1a 1b 1c 1d 1e

773,262 1f g Noncash contributions included in lines 1a-1f: $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . h Total. Add lines 1a–1f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

773,262

Busn. Code

2a . . . .POGO . . . . . . .LABOR ................................. b . ........................................... c . ........................................... d . ........................................... e . ........................................... f All other program service revenue . . . . . . . . g Total. Add lines 2a–2f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3 Investment income (including dividends, interest, and other similar amounts) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4 Income from investment of tax-exempt bond proceeds  5 Royalties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6a b c d 7a

(i) Real

(ii) Personal

Net rental income or (loss)

.........................

3,200

3,200 84

Gross rents Less: rental exps. Rental inc. or (loss) Gross amount from sales of assets other than inventory

(i) Securities



(ii) Other

600

b Less: cost or other

Other Revenue

basis & sales exps.

600 c Gain or (loss) d Net gain or (loss) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8a Gross income from fundraising events (not including $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . of contributions reported on line 1c). See Part IV, line 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a b Less: direct expenses . . . . . . . . . b c Net income or (loss) from fundraising events . . . . . .  9a Gross income from gaming activities. See Part IV, line 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a b Less: direct expenses . . . . . . . . . b c Net income or (loss) from gaming activities . . . . . . .  10a Gross sales of inventory, less returns and allowances . . . . . . . a b Less: cost of goods sold . . . . . . b c Net income or (loss) from sales of inventory . . . . . . .  Miscellaneous Revenue

600

47,169 20,815

67,984 845,130

71,784

Busn. Code

11a . .CONTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . .SERVICE ............................. b . .PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . MANAGEMENT ............................... c . ........................................... d All other revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e Total. Add lines 11a–11d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12 Total revenue. See instructions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

0 Form

DAA

84 990 (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Form 990 (2018)

Part IX

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Page

Section 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations must complete all columns. All other organizations must complete column (A). Check if Schedule O contains a response or note to any line in this Part IX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Do not include amounts reported on lines 6b, 7b, 8b, 9b, and 10b of Part VIII. 1

Statement of Functional Expenses (A) Total expenses

(B) Program service expenses

(D) Fundraising expenses

Grants and other assistance to domestic organizations and domestic governments. See Part IV, line 21 . . . . . . . .

2 3

4 5 6

7 8

Grants and other assistance to domestic individuals. See Part IV, line 22 . . . . . . . . . . . Grants and other assistance to foreign organizations, foreign governments, and foreign individuals. See Part IV, lines 15 and 16 . . . . . . . . Benefits paid to or for members . . . . . . . . . . . Compensation of current officers, directors, trustees, and key employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Compensation not included above, to disqualified persons (as defined under section 4958(f)(1)) and persons described in section 4958(c)(3)(B) . . . . . Other salaries and wages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pension plan accruals and contributions (include section 401(k) and 403(b) employer contributions) Other employee benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Payroll taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fees for services (non-employees): Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Legal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Accounting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lobbying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Professional fundraising services. See Part IV, line 17 Investment management fees . . . . . . . . . . . .

81,981

55,172

20,643

6,166

279,213

187,906

70,306

21,001

52,249 31,914

39,107 27,330

10,341 2,200

2,801 2,384

(A) amount, list line 11g expenses on Schedule O.) . . . . . .

350,207

273,001

806

76,400

10,323

7,016

1,666

1,641

45,248 19,686

34,300 17,591

8,710 1,878

2,238 217

12,835 509

8,319 509

2,524

1,992

7,566 22,397

7,566 15,190

6,260

947

93,380 6,290 3,637 2,289 757 1,029,422

93,264 4,993 271 1,620 490 773,665

96 523 87 553 208 135,709

20 774 3,279 116 59 120,048

9 10 11 a b c d e f g Other. (If line 11g amount exceeds 10% of line 25, column 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Advertising and promotion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Office expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Information technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Royalties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Occupancy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Payments of travel or entertainment expenses for any federal, state, or local public officials Conferences, conventions, and meetings . Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Payments to affiliates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Depreciation, depletion, and amortization . Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other expenses. Itemize expenses not covered above (List miscellaneous expenses in line 24e. If line 24e amount exceeds 10% of line 25, column (A) amount, list line 24e expenses on Schedule O.)

SUPPLIES a . . .PROGRAM .......................................... DEVELOPMENT b . . .RELATIONSHIP .......................................... c . . .FUNDRAISING .......................................... PROCESSING FEES d . . .PAYROLL .......................................... e All other expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Total functional expenses. Add lines 1 through 24e . . . 26 Joint costs. Complete this line only if the organization reported in column (B) joint costs from a combined educational campaign and fundraising solicitation. Check here  if following SOP 98-2 (ASC 958-720) . . . . . . . . . . . . DAA

8,901

Form

990 (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Form 990 (2018)

Part X

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Page

Check if Schedule O contains a response or note to any line in this Part X

...........................................................

(A) Beginning of year

Net Assets or Fund Balances

Liabilities

Assets

1 2 3 4 5

Cash—non-interest bearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Savings and temporary cash investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pledges and grants receivable, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Accounts receivable, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Loans and other receivables from current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, and highest compensated employees. Complete Part II of Schedule L . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Loans and other receivables from other disqualified persons (as defined under section 4958(f)(1)), persons described in section 4958(c)(3)(B), and contributing employers and sponsoring organizations of section 501(c)(9) voluntary employees' beneficiary organizations (see instructions). Complete Part II of Schedule L . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Notes and loans receivable, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Inventories for sale or use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Prepaid expenses and deferred charges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10a Land, buildings, and equipment: cost or other basis. Complete Part VI of Schedule D . . . . . . . . 10a 69,000 10b 60,145 b Less: accumulated depreciation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Investments—publicly traded securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Investments—other securities. See Part IV, line 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Investments—program-related. See Part IV, line 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Intangible assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Other assets. See Part IV, line 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Total assets. Add lines 1 through 15 (must equal line 34) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Accounts payable and accrued expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Grants payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Deferred revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Tax-exempt bond liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Escrow or custodial account liability. Complete Part IV of Schedule D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Loans and other payables to current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, highest compensated employees, and disqualified persons. Complete Part II of Schedule L . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Secured mortgages and notes payable to unrelated third parties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Unsecured notes and loans payable to unrelated third parties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Other liabilities (including federal income tax, payables to related third parties, and other liabilities not included on lines 17-24). Complete Part X of Schedule D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Total liabilities. Add lines 17 through 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Organizations that follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here  X and complete lines 27 through 29, and lines 33 and 34. 27 Unrestricted net assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Temporarily restricted net assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Permanently restricted net assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Organizations that do not follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here  and complete lines 30 through 34. 30 Capital stock or trust principal, or current funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Paid-in or capital surplus, or land, building, or equipment fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Retained earnings, endowment, accumulated income, or other funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Total net assets or fund balances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Total liabilities and net assets/fund balances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

14,560 218,902

(B) End of year 1 2 3 4

39,743 12,986

6 7 8 9

14,911

3,248 251,621

10c 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

9,205 8,855

70,789

22 23 24

6,304 6,304

25 26

9,764 9,764

-31,257 276,574

27 28 29

61,025

245,317 251,621

30 31 32 33 34

61,025 70,789 Form

DAA

Balance Sheet

990 (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Form 990 (2018)

Part XI

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Check if Schedule O contains a response or note to any line in this Part XI 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

.................................................

Total revenue (must equal Part VIII, column (A), line 12) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Total expenses (must equal Part IX, column (A), line 25) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Revenue less expenses. Subtract line 2 from line 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Net assets or fund balances at beginning of year (must equal Part X, line 33, column (A)) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Net unrealized gains (losses) on investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Donated services and use of facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Investment expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Prior period adjustments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other changes in net assets or fund balances (explain in Schedule O) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Net assets or fund balances at end of year. Combine lines 3 through 9 (must equal Part X, line 33, column (B)) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Part XII

Page

Reconciliation of Net Assets 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

845,130 1,029,422 -184,292 245,317

61,025

Financial Statements and Reporting Check if Schedule O contains a response or note to any line in this Part XII

................................................

Yes No 1

3a b

Accounting method used to prepare the Form 990: Cash Accrual X Other HYBRID If the organization changed its method of accounting from a prior year or checked “Other,” explain in Schedule O. Were the organization's financial statements compiled or reviewed by an independent accountant? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If "Yes," check a box below to indicate whether the financial statements for the year were compiled or reviewed on a separate basis, consolidated basis, or both: Separate basis Consolidated basis Both consolidated and separate basis Were the organization's financial statements audited by an independent accountant? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If "Yes," check a box below to indicate whether the financial statements for the year were audited on a separate basis, consolidated basis, or both: Separate basis Consolidated basis Both consolidated and separate basis If “Yes” to line 2a or 2b, does the organization have a committee that assumes responsibility for oversight of the audit, review, or compilation of its financial statements and selection of an independent accountant? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If the organization changed either its oversight process or selection process during the tax year, explain in Schedule O. As a result of a federal award, was the organization required to undergo an audit or audits as set forth in the Single Audit Act and OMB Circular A-133? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If “Yes,” did the organization undergo the required audit or audits? If the organization did not undergo the required audit or audits, explain why in Schedule O and describe any steps taken to undergo such audits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3a 3b Form

DAA

X 990 (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Public Charity Status and Public Support

SCHEDULE A (Form 990 or 990-EZ)

2018

Complete if the organization is a section 501(c)(3) organization or a section 4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust.

 Attach to Form 990 or Form 990-EZ.

Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service

 Go to www.irs.gov/Form990 for instructions and the latest information.

Name of the organization

Open to Public Inspection

Employer identification number

POGO PARK Part I

OMB No. 1545-0047

32-0318691

Reason for Public Charity Status (All organizations must complete this part.) See instructions.

The organization is not a private foundation because it is: (For lines 1 through 12, check only one box.) 1 A church, convention of churches, or association of churches described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(i). 2 A school described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii). (Attach Schedule E (Form 990 or 990-EZ).) 3 A hospital or a cooperative hospital service organization described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(iii). 4 A medical research organization operated in conjunction with a hospital described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(iii). Enter the hospital's name, city, and state: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An organization operated for the benefit of a college or university owned or operated by a governmental unit described in 5 section 170(b)(1)(A)(iv). (Complete Part II.) A federal, state, or local government or governmental unit described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(v). 6 7 X An organization that normally receives a substantial part of its support from a governmental unit or from the general public described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi). (Complete Part II.) 8 A community trust described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi). (Complete Part II.) 9 An agricultural research organization described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(ix) operated in conjunction with a land-grant college or university or a non-land-grant college of agriculture (see instructions). Enter the name, city, and state of the college or university: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 An organization that normally receives: (1) more than 33 1/3% of its support from contributions, membership fees, and gross receipts from activities related to its exempt functions—subject to certain exceptions, and (2) no more than 33 1/3% of its support from gross investment income and unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 tax) from businesses acquired by the organization after June 30, 1975. See section 509(a)(2). (Complete Part III.) 11 An organization organized and operated exclusively to test for public safety. See section 509(a)(4). An organization organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions of, or to carry out the purposes 12 of one or more publicly supported organizations described in section 509(a)(1) or section 509(a)(2). See section 509(a)(3). Check the box in lines 12a through 12d that describes the type of supporting organization and complete lines 12e, 12f, and 12g. a

c d

e f g

Type I. A supporting organization operated, supervised, or controlled by its supported organization(s), typically by giving the supported organization(s) the power to regularly appoint or elect a majority of the directors or trustees of the supporting organization. You must complete Part IV, Sections A and B. Type II. A supporting organization supervised or controlled in connection with its supported organization(s), by having control or management of the supporting organization vested in the same persons that control or manage the supported organization(s). You must complete Part IV, Sections A and C. Type III functionally integrated. A supporting organization operated in connection with, and functionally integrated with, its supported organization(s) (see instructions). You must complete Part IV, Sections A, D, and E. Type III non-functionally integrated. A supporting organization operated in connection with its supported organization(s) that is not functionally integrated. The organization generally must satisfy a distribution requirement and an attentiveness requirement (see instructions). You must complete Part IV, Sections A and D, and Part V. Check this box if the organization received a written determination from the IRS that it is a Type I, Type II, Type III functionally integrated, or Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organization. Enter the number of supported organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Provide the following information about the supported organization(s).

(i) Name of supported organization

(ii) EIN

(iii) Type of organization (described on lines 1–10 above (see instructions))

(iv) Is the organization listed in your governing document? Yes

(v) Amount of monetary support (see instructions)

(vi) Amount of other support (see instructions)

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E)

Total For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990 or 990-EZ. DAA

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Page 2

Part II

Support Schedule for Organizations Described in Sections 170(b)(1)(A)(iv) and 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) (Complete only if you checked the box on line 5, 7, or 8 of Part I or if the organization failed to qualify under Part III. If the organization fails to qualify under the tests listed below, please complete Part III.) Section A. Public Support Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)  1

Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") . . . . . . . .

Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf . . . . . . . . .

The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge . . . . . . . . . . Total. Add lines 1 through 3 . . . . . . . . . . The portion of total contributions by each person (other than a governmental unit or publicly supported organization) included on line 1 that exceeds 2% of the amount shown on line 11, column (f) . . . . . . . . . . Public support. Subtract line 5 from line 4 .

4 5

(a) 2014

(b) 2015

(d) 2017

(e) 2018

(f) Total

928,142

501,103

930,904

1,340,703

773,262

4,474,114

928,142

501,103

930,904

1,340,703

773,262

4,474,114

1,302,867 3,171,247

Section B. Total Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)  7 8

Amounts from line 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties, and income from similar sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Net income from unrelated business activities, whether or not the business is regularly carried on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11 12 13

(a) 2014 928,142

(b) 2015

(d) 2017

(e) 2018

501,103

930,904

1,340,703

6,293

101

441

773,262

(f) Total 4,474,114

6,835

Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part VI.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Total support. Add lines 7 through 10 4,480,949 138,987 Gross receipts from related activities, etc. (see instructions) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 First five years. If the Form 990 is for the organization’s first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a section 501(c)(3) organization, check this box and stop here . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage

14 70.77 % 14 Public support percentage for 2018 (line 6, column (f) divided by line 11, column (f)) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79.10 % 15 15 Public support percentage from 2017 Schedule A, Part II, line 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16a 33 1/3% support test—2018. If the organization did not check the box on line 13, and line 14 is 33 1/3% or more, check this X box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b 33 1/3% support test—2017. If the organization did not check a box on line 13 or 16a, and line 15 is 33 1/3% or more, check this box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17a 10%-facts-and-circumstances test—2018. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, or 16b, and line 14 is 10% or more, and if the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test, check this box and stop here. Explain in Part VI how the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b 10%-facts-and-circumstances test—2017. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, 16b, or 17a, and line 15 is 10% or more, and if the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test, check this box and stop here. Explain in Part VI how the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Private foundation. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, 16b, 17a, or 17b, check this box and see instructions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

DAA

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Page 3

Part III

Support Schedule for Organizations Described in Section 509(a)(2) (Complete only if you checked the box on line 10 of Part I or if the organization failed to qualify under Part II. If the organization fails to qualify under the tests listed below, please complete Part II.) Section A. Public Support Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)  1

Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") .

Gross receipts from admissions, merchandise sold or services performed, or facilities furnished in any activity that is related to the organization’s tax-exempt purpose . . . . . . . .

Gross receipts from activities that are not an unrelated trade or business under section 513

Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf . . . . . . . . . .

The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge . . . . . . . . . . Total. Add lines 1 through 5 . . . . . . . . . .

(a) 2014

(b) 2015

(d) 2017

(e) 2018

(f) Total

(a) 2014

(b) 2015

(d) 2017

(e) 2018

(f) Total

7a Amounts included on lines 1, 2, and 3 received from disqualified persons . . .

Amounts included on lines 2 and 3 received from other than disqualified persons that exceed the greater of $5,000 or 1% of the amount on line 13 for the year . c Add lines 7a and 7b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Public support. (Subtract line 7c from 8 line 6.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b

Section B. Total Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)  9

Amounts from line 6

..................

10a Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties, and income from similar sources . b

Unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 taxes) from businesses acquired after June 30, 1975 . . . . . . . . .

Add lines 10a and 10b

................

Net income from unrelated business activities not included in line 10b, whether or not the business is regularly carried on . .

Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part VI.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Total support. (Add lines 9, 10c, 11, and 12.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . First five years. If the Form 990 is for the organization’s first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a section 501(c)(3) organization, check this box and stop here . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

13 14

Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage 15 16

Public support percentage for 2018 (line 8, column (f), divided by line 13, column (f)) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Public support percentage from 2017 Schedule A, Part III, line 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15 16

% %

Section D. Computation of Investment Income Percentage 17 17 Investment income percentage for 2018 (line 10c, column (f), divided by line 13, column (f)) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Investment income percentage from 2017 Schedule A, Part III, line 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 19a 33 1/3% support tests—2018. If the organization did not check the box on line 14, and line 15 is more than 33 1/3%, and line 17 is not more than 33 1/3%, check this box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b 33 1/3% support tests—2017. If the organization did not check a box on line 14 or line 19a, and line 16 is more than 33 1/3%, and line 18 is not more than 33 1/3%, check this box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization . . . . . . . . . . 20 Private foundation. If the organization did not check a box on line 14, 19a, or 19b, check this box and see instructions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

% %

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018 DAA

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Page 4

Part IV

Supporting Organizations (Complete only if you checked a box in line 12 on Part I. If you checked 12a of Part I, complete Sections A and B. If you checked 12b of Part I, complete Sections A and C. If you checked 12c of Part I, complete Sections A, D, and E. If you checked 12d of Part I, complete Sections A and D, and complete Part V.) Section A. All Supporting Organizations Yes 1

3a b

c 4a b

b c 6

8 9a

b c 10a

Are all of the organization’s supported organizations listed by name in the organization’s governing documents? If "No," describe in Part VI how the supported organizations are designated. If designated by class or purpose, describe the designation. If historic and continuing relationship, explain. Did the organization have any supported organization that does not have an IRS determination of status under section 509(a)(1) or (2)? If "Yes," explain in Part VI how the organization determined that the supported organization was described in section 509(a)(1) or (2). Did the organization have a supported organization described in section 501(c)(4), (5), or (6)? If "Yes," answer (b) and (c) below. Did the organization confirm that each supported organization qualified under section 501(c)(4), (5), or (6) and satisfied the public support tests under section 509(a)(2)? If "Yes," describe in Part VI when and how the organization made the determination. Did the organization ensure that all support to such organizations was used exclusively for section 170(c)(2)(B) purposes? If "Yes," explain in Part VI what controls the organization put in place to ensure such use. Was any supported organization not organized in the United States ("foreign supported organization")? If "Yes," and if you checked 12a or 12b in Part I, answer (b) and (c) below. Did the organization have ultimate control and discretion in deciding whether to make grants to the foreign supported organization? If "Yes," describe in Part VI how the organization had such control and discretion despite being controlled or supervised by or in connection with its supported organizations. Did the organization support any foreign supported organization that does not have an IRS determination under sections 501(c)(3) and 509(a)(1) or (2)? If "Yes," explain in Part VI what controls the organization used to ensure that all support to the foreign supported organization was used exclusively for section 170(c)(2)(B) purposes. Did the organization add, substitute, or remove any supported organizations during the tax year? If "Yes," answer (b) and (c) below (if applicable). Also, provide detail in Part VI, including (i) the names and EIN numbers of the supported organizations added, substituted, or removed; (ii) the reasons for each such action; (iii) the authority under the organization's organizing document authorizing such action; and (iv) how the action was accomplished (such as by amendment to the organizing document). Type I or Type II only. Was any added or substituted supported organization part of a class already designated in the organization's organizing document? Substitutions only. Was the substitution the result of an event beyond the organization's control? Did the organization provide support (whether in the form of grants or the provision of services or facilities) to anyone other than (i) its supported organizations, (ii) individuals that are part of the charitable class benefited by one or more of its supported organizations, or (iii) other supporting organizations that also support or benefit one or more of the filing organization’s supported organizations? If "Yes," provide detail in Part VI. Did the organization provide a grant, loan, compensation, or other similar payment to a substantial contributor (as defined in section 4958(c)(3)(C)), a family member of a substantial contributor, or a 35% controlled entity with regard to a substantial contributor? If “Yes,” complete Part I of Schedule L (Form 990 or 990-EZ). Did the organization make a loan to a disqualified person (as defined in section 4958) not described in line 7? If "Yes," complete Part I of Schedule L (Form 990 or 990-EZ). Was the organization controlled directly or indirectly at any time during the tax year by one or more disqualified persons as defined in section 4946 (other than foundation managers and organizations described in section 509(a)(1) or (2))? If "Yes," provide detail in Part VI. Did one or more disqualified persons (as defined in line 9a) hold a controlling interest in any entity in which the supporting organization had an interest? If "Yes," provide detail in Part VI. Did a disqualified person (as defined in line 9a) have an ownership interest in, or derive any personal benefit from, assets in which the supporting organization also had an interest? If "Yes," provide detail in Part VI. Was the organization subject to the excess business holdings rules of section 4943 because of section 4943(f) (regarding certain Type II supporting organizations, and all Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organizations)? If "Yes," answer 10b below. Did the organization have any excess business holdings in the tax year? (Use Schedule C, Form 4720, to determine whether the organization had excess business holdings.)

2 3a

3b 3c 4a

5a 5b 5c

7 8

9a 9b 9c

10a 10b

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

DAA

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

Part IV

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Page 5

Supporting Organizations (continued)

11 Has the organization accepted a gift or contribution from any of the following persons? a A person who directly or indirectly controls, either alone or together with persons described in (b) and (c) below, the governing body of a supported organization? b A family member of a person described in (a) above? c A 35% controlled entity of a person described in (a) or (b) above? If "Yes" to a, b, or c, provide detail in Part VI.

Yes

11a 11b 11c

Section B. Type I Supporting Organizations 1

Did the directors, trustees, or membership of one or more supported organizations have the power to regularly appoint or elect at least a majority of the organization’s directors or trustees at all times during the tax year? If "No," describe in Part VI how the supported organization(s) effectively operated, supervised, or controlled the organization’s activities. If the organization had more than one supported organization, describe how the powers to appoint and/or remove directors or trustees were allocated among the supported organizations and what conditions or restrictions, if any, applied to such powers during the tax year. Did the organization operate for the benefit of any supported organization other than the supported organization(s) that operated, supervised, or controlled the supporting organization? If "Yes," explain in Part VI how providing such benefit carried out the purposes of the supported organization(s) that operated, supervised, or controlled the supporting organization.

Section C. Type II Supporting Organizations 1

Were a majority of the organization’s directors or trustees during the tax year also a majority of the directors or trustees of each of the organization’s supported organization(s)? If "No," describe in Part VI how control or management of the supporting organization was vested in the same persons that controlled or managed the supported organization(s).

Section D. All Type III Supporting Organizations 1

Did the organization provide to each of its supported organizations, by the last day of the fifth month of the organization’s tax year, (i) a written notice describing the type and amount of support provided during the prior tax year, (ii) a copy of the Form 990 that was most recently filed as of the date of notification, and (iii) copies of the organization’s governing documents in effect on the date of notification, to the extent not previously provided? Were any of the organization’s officers, directors, or trustees either (i) appointed or elected by the supported organization(s) or (ii) serving on the governing body of a supported organization? If "No," explain in Part VI how the organization maintained a close and continuous working relationship with the supported organization(s). By reason of the relationship described in (2), did the organization’s supported organizations have a significant voice in the organization’s investment policies and in directing the use of the organization’s income or assets at all times during the tax year? If "Yes," describe in Part VI the role the organization’s supported organizations played in this regard.

Section E. Type III Functionally-Integrated Supporting Organizations 1 a b c

Check the box next to the method that the organization used to satisfy the Integral Part Test during the year (see instructions). The organization satisfied the Activities Test. Complete line 2 below. The organization is the parent of each of its supported organizations. Complete line 3 below. The organization supported a governmental entity. Describe in Part VI how you supported a government entity (see instructions).

2 Activities Test. Answer (a) and (b) below. a Did substantially all of the organization’s activities during the tax year directly further the exempt purposes of the supported organization(s) to which the organization was responsive? If "Yes," then in Part VI identify those supported organizations and explain how these activities directly furthered their exempt purposes, how the organization was responsive to those supported organizations, and how the organization determined that these activities constituted substantially all of its activities. b Did the activities described in (a) constitute activities that, but for the organization’s involvement, one or more of the organization’s supported organization(s) would have been engaged in? If "Yes," explain in Part VI the reasons for the organization’s position that its supported organization(s) would have engaged in these activities but for the organization’s involvement. Parent of Supported Organizations. Answer (a) and (b) below. 3 a Did the organization have the power to regularly appoint or elect a majority of the officers, directors, or trustees of each of the supported organizations? Provide details in Part VI. b Did the organization exercise a substantial degree of direction over the policies, programs, and activities of each of its supported organizations? If "Yes," describe in Part VI the role played by the organization in this regard. DAA

Yes

3a 3b

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

Part V

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Page 6

Type III Non-Functionally Integrated 509(a)(3) Supporting Organizations

Check here if the organization satisfied the Integral Part Test as a qualifying trust on Nov. 20, 1970 (explain in Part VI). See instructions. All other Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organizations must complete Sections A through E. (B) Current Year Section A - Adjusted Net Income (A) Prior Year (optional) 1 Net short-term capital gain 1 2 Recoveries of prior-year distributions 2 3 Other gross income (see instructions) 3 4 Add lines 1 through 3. 4 5 Depreciation and depletion 5 6 Portion of operating expenses paid or incurred for production or collection of gross income or for management, conservation, or maintenance of property held for production of income (see instructions) 6 7 Other expenses (see instructions) 7 8 Adjusted Net Income (subtract lines 5, 6, and 7 from line 4) 8 (B) Current Year Section B - Minimum Asset Amount (A) Prior Year (optional) 1 Aggregate fair market value of all non-exempt-use assets (see instructions for short tax year or assets held for part of year): a Average monthly value of securities 1a b Average monthly cash balances 1b c Fair market value of other non-exempt-use assets 1c d Total (add lines 1a, 1b, and 1c) 1d e Discount claimed for blockage or other factors (explain in detail in Part VI): 2 Acquisition indebtedness applicable to non-exempt-use assets 2 3 Subtract line 2 from line 1d. 3 4 Cash deemed held for exempt use. Enter 1-1/2% of line 3 (for greater amount, see instructions). 4 5 Net value of non-exempt-use assets (subtract line 4 from line 3) 5 6 Multiply line 5 by .035. 6 7 Recoveries of prior-year distributions 7 8 Minimum Asset Amount (add line 7 to line 6) 8 Section C - Distributable Amount

Current Year

1 Adjusted net income for prior year (from Section A, line 8, Column A) 1 2 Enter 85% of line 1. 2 3 Minimum asset amount for prior year (from Section B, line 8, Column A) 3 4 Enter greater of line 2 or line 3. 4 5 Income tax imposed in prior year 5 6 Distributable Amount. Subtract line 5 from line 4, unless subject to emergency temporary reduction (see instructions). 6 7 Check here if the current year is the organization's first as a non-functionally integrated Type III supporting organization (see instructions). Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

DAA

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

Part V

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Section D - Distributions 1 2

Amounts paid to supported organizations to accomplish exempt purposes Amounts paid to perform activity that directly furthers exempt purposes of supported organizations, in excess of income from activity Administrative expenses paid to accomplish exempt purposes of supported organizations Amounts paid to acquire exempt-use assets Qualified set-aside amounts (prior IRS approval required) Other distributions (describe in Part VI). See instructions. Total annual distributions. Add lines 1 through 6. Distributions to attentive supported organizations to which the organization is responsive (provide details in Part VI). See instructions. Distributable amount for 2018 from Section C, line 6 Line 8 amount divided by line 9 amount (i) Section E - Distribution Allocations (see instructions) Excess Distributions

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 2

3 a b c d e f g h i j 4 a b c 5

7 8 a b c d e

Page 7

Type III Non-Functionally Integrated 509(a)(3) Supporting Organizations (continued) Current Year

(ii) Underdistributions Pre-2018

(iii) Distributable Amount for 2018

Distributable amount for 2018 from Section C, line 6 Underdistributions, if any, for years prior to 2018 (reasonable cause required-explain in Part VI). See instructions. Excess distributions carryover, if any, to 2018 From 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . From 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . From 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . From 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . From 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Total of lines 3a through e Applied to underdistributions of prior years Applied to 2018 distributable amount Carryover from 2013 not applied (see instructions) Remainder. Subtract lines 3g, 3h, and 3i from 3f. Distributions for 2018 from Section D, line 7: $ Applied to underdistributions of prior years Applied to 2018 distributable amount Remainder. Subtract lines 4a and 4b from 4. Remaining underdistributions for years prior to 2018, if any. Subtract lines 3g and 4a from line 2. For result greater than zero, explain in Part VI. See instructions. Remaining underdistributions for 2018. Subtract lines 3h and 4b from line 1. For result greater than zero, explain in Part VI. See instructions. Excess distributions carryover to 2019. Add lines 3j and 4c. Breakdown of line 7: Excess from 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Excess from 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Excess from 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Excess from 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Excess from 2018 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

DAA

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

Part VI

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Page 8

Supplemental Information. Provide the explanations required by Part II, line 10; Part II, line 17a or 17b; Part III, line 12; Part IV, Section A, lines 1, 2, 3b, 3c, 4b, 4c, 5a, 6, 9a, 9b, 9c, 11a, 11b, and 11c; Part IV, Section B, lines 1 and 2; Part IV, Section C, line 1; Part IV, Section D, lines 2 and 3; Part IV, Section E, lines 1c, 2a, 2b, 3a, and 3b; Part V, line 1; Part V, Section B, line 1e; Part V, Section D, lines 5, 6, and 8; and Part V, Section E, lines 2, 5, and 6. Also complete this part for any additional information. (See instructions.)

. ................................................................................................................................................................

. ...............................................................................................................................................................

. ................................................................................................................................................................

DAA

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2018

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Schedule B

OMB No. 1545-0047

Schedule of Contributors

(Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF)

2018

 Attach to Form 990, Form 990-EZ, or Form 990-PF.  Go to www.irs.gov/Form990 for the latest information.

Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service

Employer identification number

Name of the organization

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Organization type (check one): Filers of:

Section:

Form 990 or 990-EZ

501(c)(

) (enter number) organization

4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust not treated as a private foundation 527 political organization Form 990-PF

501(c)(3) exempt private foundation 4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust treated as a private foundation 501(c)(3) taxable private foundation

Check if your organization is covered by the General Rule or a Special Rule. Note: Only a section 501(c)(7), (8), or (10) organization can check boxes for both the General Rule and a Special Rule. See instructions. General Rule For an organization filing Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF that received, during the year, contributions totaling $5,000 or more (in money or property) from any one contributor. Complete Parts I and II. See instructions for determining a contributor's total contributions. Special Rules

For an organization described in section 501(c)(3) filing Form 990 or 990-EZ that met the 33 1/3% support test of the regulations under sections 509(a)(1) and 170(b)(1)(A)(vi), that checked Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ), Part II, line 13, 16a, or 16b, and that received from any one contributor, during the year, total contributions of the greater of (1) $5,000; or (2) 2% of the amount on (i) Form 990, Part VIII, line 1h; or (ii) Form 990-EZ, line 1. Complete Parts I and II. For an organization described in section 501(c)(7), (8), or (10) filing Form 990 or 990-EZ that received from any one contributor, during the year, total contributions of more than $1,000 exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary, or educational purposes, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals. Complete Parts I (entering) "N/A" in column (b) instead of the contributor name and address), II, and III. For an organization described in section 501(c)(7), (8), or (10) filing Form 990 or 990-EZ that received from any one contributor, during the year, contributions exclusively for religious, charitable, etc., purposes, but no such contributions totaled more than $1,000. If this box is checked, enter here the total contributions that were received during the year for an exclusively religious, charitable, etc., purpose. Don't complete any of the parts unless the General Rule applies to this organization because it received nonexclusively religious, charitable, etc., contributions $ ........................... totaling $5,000 or more during the year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Caution: An organization that isn't covered by the General Rule and/or the Special Rules doesn't file Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF), but it must answer “No” on Part IV, line 2, of its Form 990; or check the box on line H of its Form 990-EZ or on its Form 990-PF, Part I, line 2, to certify that it doesn't meet the filing requirements of Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF). For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the instructions for Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF.

DAA

Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

PAGE 1 OF 2

Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2018)

Name of organization

POGO PARK Part I (a) No.

. ......

Contributors (see instructions). Use duplicate copies of Part I if additional space is needed. (b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4

THE CALIFORNIA ENDOWMENT 1000 NORTH ALAMEDA STREET

. ..........................................................................

. LOS . . . . . . . . .ANGELES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CA . . . . . . 90012 .....................

. ......

(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4

DENISE YAMAMOTO & JOSH HANNAH 5809 IVANHOE ROAD

. OAKLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CA . . . . . . 94618 .....................

. ......

(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4

THE SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION ONE EMBARCADERO CTR, STE., 1400

. .SAN . . . . . . . . .FRANCISCO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CA . . . . . . 94111 .....................

. ......

(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4

SUNLIGHT GIVING FOUNDATION 855 EL CAMINO REAL, BLDG. 4, STE 250 $

. PALO . . . . . . . . . . .ALTO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CA . . . . . . 94301 .....................

. ......

(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4

EAST BAY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION 200 FRANK H. OGAWA PLAZA

. .OAKLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CA . . . . . . 94612 .....................

. ......

50,000

...........................

. ..........................................................................

............................................................................

(a) No.

40,000

...........................

. ..........................................................................

............................................................................

(a) No.

70,000

...........................

............................................................................

(a) No.

133,000

...........................

. ..........................................................................

............................................................................

(a) No.

32-0318691

............................................................................

(a) No.

Page

Employer identification number

(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4

20,000

...........................

RICHMOND COMMUNITY FUND 1014 FLORIDA AVENUE, SUITE 200

. ..........................................................................

. RICHMOND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CA . . . . . . 94804 .....................

188,194

...........................

(d) Type of contribution Person X Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.) (d) Type of contribution

X Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.) (d) Type of contribution Person X Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.) (d) Type of contribution

X Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.) (d) Type of contribution

X Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)

Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2018) DAA

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

PAGE 2 OF 2

Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2018)

Name of organization

POGO PARK Part I (a) No.

. ......

Contributors (see instructions). Use duplicate copies of Part I if additional space is needed. (b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4

REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 1111 FRANKLIN STREET, 12TH FLOOR

. ..........................................................................

. OAKLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CA . . . . . . 94607 .....................

. ......

(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4

DEAN AND MARGARET LESHER FOUNDATION 1333 N. CALIFORNIA BLVD., STE. 330 $

. WALNUT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CREEK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CA . . . . . . 94596 .....................

. ......

(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4

KAISER PERMANENTE 4501 BROADWAY, 2ND FLOOR

. .OAKLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CA . . . . . . 94611 .....................

. ......

25,000

...........................

............................................................................

(a) No.

50,000

...........................

. ..........................................................................

............................................................................

(a) No.

(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4

30,000

...........................

. ..........................................................................

............................................................................

...........................

. ..........................................................................

(a) No. . ......

(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4

. ..........................................................................

............................................................................

...........................

............................................................................

(a) No. . ......

32-0318691

............................................................................

(a) No.

Page

Employer identification number

(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4

. ..........................................................................

. .......................................................................... . ..........................................................................

...........................

(d) Type of contribution Person X Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.) (d) Type of contribution

X Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.) (d) Type of contribution Person X Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.) (d) Type of contribution Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.) (d) Type of contribution Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.) (d) Type of contribution Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)

Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2018) DAA

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

SCHEDULE D (Form 990) Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service

Supplemental Financial Statements

32-0318691

Organizations Maintaining Donor Advised Funds or Other Similar Funds or Accounts. Complete if the organization answered “Yes” on Form 990, Part IV, line 6. (a) Donor advised funds

2 a b c d 3 4 5 6

(b) Funds and other accounts

Total number at end of year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aggregate value of contributions to (during year) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aggregate value of grants from (during year) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aggregate value at end of year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization inform all donors and donor advisors in writing that the assets held in donor advised funds are the organization’s property, subject to the organization’s exclusive legal control? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did the organization inform all grantees, donors, and donor advisors in writing that grant funds can be used only for charitable purposes and not for the benefit of the donor or donor advisor, or for any other purpose conferring impermissible private benefit? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Part II 1

Open to Public Inspection

Employer identification number

POGO PARK

1 2 3 4 5

2018

Part IV, line 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11a, 11b, 11c, 11d, 11e, 11f, 12a, or 12b.  Attach to Form 990.  Go to www.irs.gov/Form990 for instructions and the latest information.

Name of the organization

Part I

OMB No. 1545-0047

 Complete if the organization answered “Yes” on Form 990,

Yes

Conservation Easements. Complete if the organization answered “Yes” on Form 990, Part IV, line 7.

Purpose(s) of conservation easements held by the organization (check all that apply). Preservation of land for public use (e.g., recreation or education) Preservation of a historically important land area Protection of natural habitat Preservation of a certified historic structure Preservation of open space Complete lines 2a through 2d if the organization held a qualified conservation contribution in the form of a conservation easement on the last day of the tax year. Held at the End of the Tax Year 2a Total number of conservation easements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Total acreage restricted by conservation easements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2b Number of conservation easements on a certified historic structure included in (a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2c Number of conservation easements included in (c) acquired after 7/25/06, and not on a historic structure listed in the National Register . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2d Number of conservation easements modified, transferred, released, extinguished, or terminated by the organization during the tax year  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of states where property subject to conservation easement is located  . . . . . Does the organization have a written policy regarding the periodic monitoring, inspection, handling of Yes violations, and enforcement of the conservation easements it holds? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staff and volunteer hours devoted to monitoring, inspecting, handling of violations, and enforcing conservation easements during the year



...............

Amount of expenses incurred in monitoring, inspecting, handling of violations, and enforcing conservation easements during the year  $ ..........................

Does each conservation easement reported on line 2(d) above satisfy the requirements of section 170(h)(4)(B)(i) and section 170(h)(4)(B)(ii)? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In Part XIII, describe how the organization reports conservation easements in its revenue and expense statement, and balance sheet, and include, if applicable, the text of the footnote to the organization’s financial statements that describes the organization’s accounting for conservation easements.

Part III

Yes

Organizations Maintaining Collections of Art, Historical Treasures, or Other Similar Assets. Complete if the organization answered “Yes” on Form 990, Part IV, line 8.

1a If the organization elected, as permitted under SFAS 116 (ASC 958), not to report in its revenue statement and balance sheet works of art, historical treasures, or other similar assets held for public exhibition, education, or research in furtherance of public service, provide, in Part XIII, the text of the footnote to its financial statements that describes these items. b If the organization elected, as permitted under SFAS 116 (ASC 958), to report in its revenue statement and balance sheet works of art, historical treasures, or other similar assets held for public exhibition, education, or research in furtherance of public service, provide the following amounts relating to these items: (i) Revenue included on Form 990, Part VIII, line 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (ii) Assets included in Form 990, Part X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 If the organization received or held works of art, historical treasures, or other similar assets for financial gain, provide the following amounts required to be reported under SFAS 116 (ASC 958) relating to these items: a Revenue included on Form 990, Part VIII, line 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b Assets included in Form 990, Part X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  $ Schedule D (Form 990) 2018 For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990. DAA

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

POGO PARK 32-0318691 Page 2 Organizations Maintaining Collections of Art, Historical Treasures, or Other Similar Assets (continued)

Schedule D (Form 990) 2018

Part III 3

Using the organization’s acquisition, accession, and other records, check any of the following that are a significant use of its collection items (check all that apply):

a Public exhibition d Loan or exchange programs e b Scholarly research Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c Preservation for future generations 4 Provide a description of the organization’s collections and explain how they further the organization’s exempt purpose in Part XIII. 5 During the year, did the organization solicit or receive donations of art, historical treasures, or other similar assets to be sold to raise funds rather than to be maintained as part of the organization’s collection? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Part IV

Yes

Escrow and Custodial Arrangements. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" on Form 990, Part IV, line 9, or reported an amount on Form 990, Part X, line 21.

1a Is the organization an agent, trustee, custodian or other intermediary for contributions or other assets not included on Form 990, Part X? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b If “Yes,” explain the arrangement in Part XIII and complete the following table:

Yes

Amount c d e f 2a b

1c Beginning balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Additions during the year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1d 1e Distributions during the year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1f Ending balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes Did the organization include an amount on Form 990, Part X, line 21, for escrow or custodial account liability? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If “Yes,” explain the arrangement in Part XIII. Check here if the explanation has been provided on Part XIII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Part V

Endowment Funds. Complete if the organization answered “Yes” on Form 990, Part IV, line 10. (a) Current year

(b) Prior year

(d) Three years back

1a Beginning of year balance . . . . . . . . . . . . b Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c Net investment earnings, gains, and losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d Grants or scholarships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e Other expenditures for facilities and programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f Administrative expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . g End of year balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Provide the estimated percentage of the current year end balance (line 1g, column (a)) held as: a Board designated or quasi-endowment  . . . . . . . . . . . . % . b Permanent endowment  . . . . . . . . . . . . % c Temporarily restricted endowment  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . % The percentages on lines 2a, 2b, and 2c should equal 100%. 3a Are there endowment funds not in the possession of the organization that are held and administered for the organization by: (i) unrelated organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (ii) related organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b If “Yes” on line 3a(ii), are the related organizations listed as required on Schedule R? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Describe in Part XIII the intended uses of the organization’s endowment funds.

Part VI

(e) Four years back

Yes

3a(i) 3a(ii) 3b

Land, Buildings, and Equipment. Complete if the organization answered “Yes” on Form 990, Part IV, line 11a. See Form 990, Part X, line 10. Description of property

(a) Cost or other basis

(b) Cost or other basis

(investment)

(other)

depreciation

(d) Book value

1a Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b Buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c Leasehold improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69,000 60,145 e Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Total. Add lines 1a through 1e. (Column (d) must equal Form 990, Part X, column (B), line 10c.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

8,855 8,855

Schedule D (Form 990) 2018

DAA

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

POGO PARK 32-0318691 Page 3 Investments—Other Securities. Complete if the organization answered “Yes” on Form 990, Part IV, line 11b. See Form 990, Part X, line 12.

Schedule D (Form 990) 2018

Part VII

(b) Book value

(a) Description of security or category

(including name of security)

(1) Financial derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2) Closely-held equity interests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3) Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A) ........................................................................ . . . . (B) ........................................................................ . . . . (C) ........................................................................ . . . . (D) ........................................................................ . . . . (E) ........................................................................ . . . . (F) ........................................................................ . . . . (G) ........................................................................ . . . . (H) ........................................................................ Total. (Column (b) must equal Form 990, Part X, col. (B) line 12.) 

Part VIII

Investments—Program Related. Complete if the organization answered “Yes” on Form 990, Part IV, line 11c. See Form 990, Part X, line 13. (a) Description of investment

(b) Book value

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Total. (Column (b) must equal Form 990, Part X, col. (B) line 13.) 

Part IX

Other Assets. Complete if the organization answered “Yes” on Form 990, Part IV, line 11d. See Form 990, Part X, line 15. (a) Description

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Total. (Column (b) must equal Form 990, Part X, col. (B) line 15.)

Part X

..........................................................

(b) Book value



Other Liabilities. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" on Form 990, Part IV, line 11e or 11f. See Form 990, Part X, line 25.

(a) Description of liability (b) Book value 1. (1) Federal income taxes (2) CREDIT CARD 9,601 (3) PAYROLL LIABILITY 109 71 (4) EMPLOYEE REIMBURSEMENT PAYABLE -17 (5) SALES TAX LIABILITY (6) (7) (8) (9) Total. (Column (b) must equal Form 990, Part X, col. (B) line 25.)  9,764 2. Liability for uncertain tax positions. In Part XIII, provide the text of the footnote to the organization’s financial statements that reports the organization's liability for uncertain tax positions under FIN 48 (ASC 740). Check here if the text of the footnote has been provided in Part XIII DAA

....

Schedule D (Form 990) 2018

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Schedule D (Form 990) 2018

Part XI 1 2 a b c d e 3 4 a b c 5

2e 3

4c 5

Reconciliation of Expenses per Audited Financial Statements With Expenses per Return. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" on Form 990, Part IV, line 12a.

Total expenses and losses per audited financial statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Amounts included on line 1 but not on Form 990, Part IX, line 25: 2a Donated services and use of facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2b Prior year adjustments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2c Other losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2d Other (Describe in Part XIII.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Add lines 2a through 2d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subtract line 2e from line 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Amounts included on Form 990, Part IX, line 25, but not on line 1: 4a Investment expenses not included on Form 990, Part VIII, line 7b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4b Other (Describe in Part XIII.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Add lines 4a and 4b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Total expenses. Add lines 3 and 4c. (This must equal Form 990, Part I, line 18.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Part XIII

Page 4

32-0318691

Total revenue, gains, and other support per audited financial statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Amounts included on line 1 but not on Form 990, Part VIII, line 12: 2a Net unrealized gains (losses) on investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2b Donated services and use of facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2c Recoveries of prior year grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2d Other (Describe in Part XIII.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Add lines 2a through 2d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subtract line 2e from line 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Amounts included on Form 990, Part VIII, line 12, but not on line 1: 4a Investment expenses not included on Form 990, Part VIII, line 7b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4b Other (Describe in Part XIII.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Add lines 4a and 4b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Total revenue. Add lines 3 and 4c. (This must equal Form 990, Part I, line 12.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Part XII 1 2 a b c d e 3 4 a b c 5

POGO PARK

Reconciliation of Revenue per Audited Financial Statements With Revenue per Return. Complete if the organization answered “Yes” on Form 990, Part IV, line 12a.

2e 3

4c 5

Supplemental Information.

Provide the descriptions required for Part II, lines 3, 5, and 9; Part III, lines 1a and 4; Part IV, lines 1b and 2b; Part V, line 4; Part X, line 2; Part XI, lines 2d and 4b; and Part XII, lines 2d and 4b. Also complete this part to provide any additional information. . ................................................................................................................................................................

. ................................................................................................................................................................

Schedule D (Form 990) 2018 DAA

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Schedule D (Form 990) 2018

Part XIII

POGO PARK

32-0318691

Page 5

Supplemental Information (continued)

. ................................................................................................................................................................

Schedule D (Form 990) 2018 DAA

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

SCHEDULE O

Supplemental Information to Form 990 or 990-EZ

(Form 990 or 990-EZ)

Complete to provide information for responses to specific questions on Form 990 or 990-EZ or to provide any additional information.

2018

 Attach to Form 990 or 990-EZ.  Go to www.irs.gov/Form990 for the latest information.

Open to Public Inspection

Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service

Name of the organization

OMB No. 1545-0047

Employer identification number

POGO PARK

32-0318691

FORM 990 - ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

. ................................................................................................................................................................

PART I SUMMARY - POGO PARK PROVIDES CHILDREN LIVING IN INNER-CITY

. ................................................................................................................................................................

NEIGHBORHOODS WITH HIGH-QUALITY, ENRICHED PLAY OPPORTUNITIES THAT ARE

. ................................................................................................................................................................

DESIGNED TO SPARK AND FOSTER HEALTHY CHILD DEVELOPMENT. POGO PARK HIRES,

. ................................................................................................................................................................

TRAINS, AND EMPOWERS LOCAL RESIDENTS TO DESIGN, BUILD AND MANAGE CITY PARKS

. ................................................................................................................................................................

AND PLAYGROUNDS AS A VEHICLE TO TRANSFORM COMMUNITIES.

. ................................................................................................................................................................

FORM 990, PART III, LINE 4D - ALL OTHER ACCOMPLISHMENTS

. ................................................................................................................................................................

POGO PARK ACQUIRES AND DEVELOPS LAND FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD AND TO PROVIDE A

. ................................................................................................................................................................

SOURCE OF REVENUE TO FUND POGO PARK'S PROGRAMS.

. ................................................................................................................................................................

POGO PARK RUNS POGO PARK PRODUCTS, A SOCIAL ENTERPRISE, THAT DESIGNS AND

. ................................................................................................................................................................

BUILDS A BRANDED LINE OF PLAY PRODUCTS AND PROVIDES DESIGN/BUILDING

. ................................................................................................................................................................

SERVICES.

. ................................................................................................................................................................

FORM 990, PART VI, LINE 11B - ORGANIZATION'S PROCESS TO REVIEW FORM 990

. ................................................................................................................................................................

NO REVIEW WAS OR WILL BE CONDUCTED.

. ................................................................................................................................................................

FORM 990, PART VI, LINE 12C - ENFORCEMENT OF CONFLICTS POLICY

. ................................................................................................................................................................

ANY POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT MAY AFFECT A MATTER UNDER

. ................................................................................................................................................................

CONSIDERATION SHALL BE DISCLOSED BY THE BOARD MEMBER TO THE BOARD OF

. ................................................................................................................................................................

DIRECTORS AND MADE A MATTER OF RECORD AS SOON AS THE POSSIBLE CONFLICT

. ................................................................................................................................................................

DETERMINED. THE INTERESTED BOARD MEMBER SHALL NOT VOTE ON SUCH MATTER AND

. ................................................................................................................................................................

SHALL NOT ATTEMPT TO EXERT INFLUENCE IN CONNECTION WITH THE MATTER.

. ................................................................................................................................................................

FORM 990, PART VI, LINE 15A - COMPENSATION PROCESS FOR TOP OFFICIAL

. ................................................................................................................................................................

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990 or 990-EZ. DAA

Schedule O (Form 990 or 990-EZ) (2018)

POGOPARK 02/18/2020 10:15 AM

Schedule O (Form 990 or 990-EZ) (2018)

Page

Name of the organization

Employer identification number

POGO PARK

32-0318691

EACH YEAR, POGO PARK CONDUCTS A SURVEY OF SIMILAR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS

. ................................................................................................................................................................

IN THE BAY AREA TO DETERMINE COMPENSATION FOR ALL POSITIONS IN THE COMPANY:

. ................................................................................................................................................................

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE. THOSE FIGURES ARE PRESENTED TO POGO PARK'S

. ................................................................................................................................................................

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AT ITS FIRST ANNUAL MEETING IN ORDER TO APPROVE

. ................................................................................................................................................................

COMPENSATION FOR ALL TOP MANAGEMENT AND KEY EMPLOYEES.

. ................................................................................................................................................................

FORM 990, PART VI, LINE 15B - COMPENSATION PROCESS FOR OFFICERS