HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.1 Lead Abatement Program t' 1
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 25, 1991
SUBJECT: ALAMEDA COUNTY LEAD ABATEMENT PROGRAM
Report by: Victor Taugher, Building Official
EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1. Letter from David Kearns to Richard
Ambrose dated January 18, 1991
2 . Letter from David Kearns to Alameda County
Board of Supervisors with Attachments
dated December 20, 1990
3 . Briefs from Alameda County Board of
Supervisors dated January 15, 1991
4 . Undated Item Outlining Questions from the
Alameda County Board of Supervisors on the
Lead Abatement Program
5. Alameda County Health Department Estimate
of Dwelling Units & Children Ages 0-6
6. Charts Relating to Lead Poisoning Cases
7. Chart of Proposed Abatement Progress
Profile dated January 3 , 1991
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Hear presentation from Staff
�j 2) Hear presentation from Alameda County
Y'� J Health Care Services Agency
3) Instruct Staff to present the Council
concerns to the Alameda County Board of
Supervisors
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: A special assessment of at least $10. 00 per
dwelling unit for at least 25 years is proposed. There are 3,578
single-family dwelling units and 160 multi-family dwelling units affected
by the program with a minimum cost to Dublin residents of $934,500.
In addition property owners with lead contamination would have to pay all
abatement costs over $1, 000.
DESCRIPTION: On January 15, 1991, the Alameda County Board
of Supervisors approved, in principal, the Alameda County Health Care
Services Agencies (ACHCSA) proposed Lead Abatement Program. However, the
Board requested that 10 issues shown on Exhibit 3 be resolved. The
ACHCSA is attempting to address those issues now, but results of that
study are not available.
The ACHCSA perceives that there is a serious threat to the children in
the County from lead poisoning. Apparently, small children ingest lead
primarily by chewing on surfaces having lead based paint and from paint
chips peeling from painted surfaces in and around the home. Attachment
F in Exhibit 1 indicates costs of lead poisoning for medical treatment
and remedial education is $43, 357 per person.
---------------
ITEM N0. COPIES-TO: --ACHCSA
J��& ,5562(-) - -7,9
Y R
ACHCSA proposes to screen all dwelling units built before 1978 for lead
sources. (In 1978, EPA banned the use of lead paint in homes)
Approximately 438, 000 dwelling units would be screened at a cost of
$500. 00 per dwelling unit. ACHCSA assumes 25% would be free of lead
leaving 328,500 dwelling units requiring abatement.
It is estimated by ACHCSA that abatement costs would be $3, 000 to $6, 000
per dwelling unit. However, a report released by HUD indicates costs
would be in the order of $5,500 to $11,900 per unit, plus the costs of
testing and relocation of occupants. The program is to be financed by a
$10. 00 or higher per year special assessment per dwelling unit. Recent
discussions indicate the assessment would increase based on building area
or assessed value. ACHCSA hopes to gain additional financing from HUD
grants (which are probably committed to other worthy programs) and a tax
on the sale of paint.
Based on what is presently known of the proposal the effects on the City
are analyzed as follows:
First, the number of dwelling units listed on Exhibit 5 is incorrect.
There are 2 dwellings built before 1960 (actually one is used for day
care but should be included in any program) . There are 3,466 single-
family and 88 multi-family dwelling units constructed prior to 1970.
There are 3 , 578 single-family and 160 multi-family dwelling units
constructed before 1978 . These figures exclude the Federal and County
property at Camp Parks and Santa Rita since the City probably cannot tax
or regulate Federal and County property.
The 3 ,748 dwelling units would pay a minimum of $10. 00 per dwelling unit
for 25 years or a total of $250 per unit. The 3 ,748 dwelling units would
be screened for lead at a cost of $500 per dwelling unit. Using ACHCSA
figures 75% or 2, 811 dwelling units would require abatement at a cost of
between $3 , 000 and $11, 900 per unit. However, the County would only
subsidize the first $1, 000 so the net cost to the owners of 75% of the
dwelling units would range from a low of $2,250 (abatement + tax - 1, 000
subsidy) to a high of $11, 150. The total cost to the owners would be:
Low Estimate
Tax - 3 , 748 x 10 x 25 years $ 937, 000
Abatement - 2811 x (3 , 000 - 1, 000 subsidy) 5, 622 , 000
$ 6, 559, 000
High Estimate
Tax - 3 , 748 x 10 x 25 years 937, 000
Abatement - 2811 x (11, 900-1, 000 subsidy) $30, 639,900
These costs do not include inflation. $31, 576, 900
It is the opinion of the Building Official that very few pre 1978 homes
have lead based paint. Although home building began in Dublin in 1960,
the use of latex paint was prevalent in tract construction at that time.
r
The Building Official has recommended to ACHCSA that several homes in
each of the 33 pre 1978 tracts be tested for lead. If the results are
negative in the random sample it can be reasonably assumed that there is
no lead in the other homes in the same tract. Thus, efforts could be
concentrated in those tracts that may have lead paint. Also, the overall
costs to the owners in Dublin could be reduced.
The program would cost betweenil.2 anA .1 billion county wide. The only
known funding at $10. 00 per dwelling unit will only generate 109. 5
million. Again these figures make no allowance for inflation.
The other side of the issue is that there are no reliable statistics as
to how many children are affected by lead poisoning where the children
live. The charts on Exhibit 6 are not very clear, but apparently there
were 33 cases in 15 years. In .order to prevent 2 . 2 cases per year it is
proposed to_ spend from a low of X48 million per year to a high of-k64
million per year. The cost of treating 2 . 2 cases per year is $95, 385.
The Building Official recommends that the City Council request the County
to do pilot studies to determine, on the basis of random sampling, how
many dwelling units contain lead paint, prior to participating in the
program.
ALAMEDA COUNTY R E C E I V E D
HEALTH CARE SERVICEb �a�` JAN 25 11991
AGENCY
' �! Y O DUBLIN
DAVID J. KEARS,Agency Director RAFAT A.SHAHICj J ss"tant Agency Director
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
80 Swan Way, Rm. 210
Oakland, CA 94621
January 18, 1991 (415)271-4300
Mr. Richard C. Ambrose
City Manager
City of Dublin
100 Civic Center Plaza
Dublin, CA. 94568
Dear Mr. Ambrose: :
On January- 15, 1991 the Board of Supervisors of Alameda County
approved "in principle" the Health Care Service Agency`s revised
proposal for a County operated Lead Abatement Program and its
proposed special benefit assessment financing mechanism, as well as
certain other recommendations related thereto.
A copy of the revised County Lead Abatement Program proposal is
attached for your information, review and comment.
The revised proposal took into consideration input and suggestions
from city representatives and community groups. It also addresses
concerns and interests voiced by certain city managers and several
city councils. The proposal reflects change by providing the
following upgraded services:
1. Allocate resource to increase children's referral for
screening and case management.
2 . Accelerate the abatement process by capping the cost of
abatement to a $1, 000 subsidy per dwelling unit.
3 . Increase the annual home abatement number from 600 units to
3 , 000 units.
4 . Initiate proposal for supportive State legislation for an
excise tax on paint, which would provide additional financing
to allow for an accelerated abatement process.
It should be noted that the following work session and public
hearing have been scheduled by the Board of Supervisors, for the
purpose of further discussion and comment regarding the proposed
program:
EXHIa-IT 1
f
City Manager
page 2
January 18, 1991
Date: March 19, 1991
Time: 10: 00 a.m.
Location: 1221 Oak Street, Rm. 536, Oakland
and a public hearing is scheduled for:
Date: April 23, 1991
Time: 10: 00 a.m.
Location: 1221 Oak Street, Rm. 536, Oakland
Your City's active input and support is requested to assist us in
the final planning and design of a comprehensive workable program
for the prevention of childhood lead poisoning.
If you should have any further questions, please contact me at 268-
2722 or Rafat Shahid, Assistant Agency Director, Department of
Environmental Health at 271-4300.
Sincerely,
David Kears, Director
Health Care Services Agency
Attachment
DJK:RAS: fh
CC: Members of the Board of Supervisors, (w/o attachment)
Mr. Peter Snyder, Mayor , (w/attachment)
Steven Szalay, County Administrator, (w/o attachment)
Rafat Shahid, Asst. Agency Director, Environmental Health,
(w/o attachment)
Ms. Cece Farias, Dublin Representative
DO1
f
ALAMEDA COUNTY AGENDA January 8, 1991
HEALTH CARE SERVICES 40
AGENCY
DAVID J. KEARS, Agency Director RAFAT A.SHAHID,Assistant Agency Director
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
470- 27th Street,Third Floor
December 20, 1990 Oakland,California 94612
(415) 271-4313
Honorable Board of Supervisors
1221 Oak Street
Administration Building
Oakland, CA. 94621
Subject: PROPOSED COUNTY PROGRAM FOR THE ABATEMENT OF
TOXIC LEAD CONTAMINATION IN THE ENVIRONMENT
RECOMMENDATIONS:
In order to implement the Board's directive of September 25, 1990 for the
development of a detailed comprehensive proposal for the abatement of toxic lead
contamination in the environment, it is recommended that your Board:
,
(I 1. Approve in principle the proposed County—operated Lead Abatement Program
as outlined in Attachments "A" and "B", and its proposed "special benefit
assessment district" financing mechanism.
i
2. Approve and authorize the scheduling of a work session in March 1991, and
a public hearing in April 1991, for the purpose of further discussion and
comment regarding the proposed program.
3. Authorize the Agency's Department of Environmental Health to formally
advise representatives of the County's cities and other interested parties
of these hearings, and to solicit their active participation in these
proceedings.
4. Authorize the Agency's Department of Environmental Health in conjunction
with the County's cities to initiate the necessary preliminary actions to
establish a Special Benefit Assessment District under the provision of the
Government Code Section 25210.01 et. seq. (The actual establishment of
the District would be contingent upon your Board's "final" approval of the
program and its financing prior to June 30, 1991.)
SUMMARY:
On September 25, 1990 your Board reviewed the Agency's preliminary proposal for
a County Program for the abatement of toxic lead contamination in the
environment.
EXH18'
iT
Your Board further approved the Agency's request to finalize and submit a
comprehensive program proposal for consideration and approval in December 1990.
However, because of the program's complexity, the need to provide additional time
for input from the cities, and to more adequately address certain program issues,
a delay in the submission of this status report until January 8, 1991 was
necessary.
The basic changes incorporated in this revised and more detailed program proposal
as compared with the preliminary proposal presented in September. 1990, are the
following:
-- Pre-1978 constructed dwelling units are now proposed to be
included in the program's service focus, as well as the benefit
assessment financing, rather than pre-1970 constructed dwellings
based on the Federal Housing and Urban Developments (H.U.D.'s)
guidelines for abatement of lead based paint from dwellings.
This increases the number of dwelling units concerned from
an estimated 365,000 to 438,000.
--- The financing available from this larger pool of dwelling units,
assuming the application of a $10 annual benefit assessment rate on
pre-1978 dwelling units, would support an operating budget of
$4,380,000 rather than the $3,650,000 budget earlier estimated.
-- The average cost of abatement has been increased from $3,000 to
$6,000 per dwelling unit. However, an estimated 3,000 dwelling
units rather than the earlier estimate of 1,000 could be abated if
a $1,000 homeowner abatement subsidy limit were put into effect,
with the balance of the cost being borne by the homeowner.
(Homeowners who qualify for H.U.D. grants may be able to use these
rehabilitation funds to partially or fully offset their residual
abatement costs.)
There is an urgent public health need to design and implement a service program
within the County, which would abate this toxic lead contamination in the
County's older housing units environment.
The magnitude of the potential toxic lead contamination problem in Alameda County
is reflected in the estimated number of pre-1978 constructed dwellings (438,000)
and the projected estimate of children, 0-6 years of age living in these
dwellings (81,000) .
Your Board's approval "in principle" of the proposed program and its financing
is solicited to enable the Agency's Department of Environmental Health, in
consultation with city representatives, to further develop the specifics of a
program to address this health need.
2
1 , 1
DISCUSSION/FINDINGS:
The Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Act of 1976 restricted the sale of lead-
based paint for residential use to less than 0.06 percent lead. Prior to the
1976 laws, some interior paints contained more than 50 percent lead.
Scientific literature indicates that children are commonly exposed to lead via
normal mouthing activities that occur as they explore their. environment. They
investigate objects by tasting and biting on them. Children are less likely than
adults to reject foods, which have fallen on dirty or dusty surfaces that may
contain lead and are also less likely to have clean hands. The child's natural
behavior tends to expose them to some of the highest concentrations of lead in
the environment. A child whose diet is deficient in iron is more vulnerable to
lead poisoning. Nutritional deficiencies in calcium, zinc, and magnesium may
also affect lead absorption. Thus, poor nutrition can exacerbate lead poisoning
in children.
Previous studies and grants dealing with childhood lead poisoning programs have
focused on medical and environmental screening and case management without making
an effort toward environmental abatement. Consequently, the County is left with
a static pool of contaminated lead-painted properties and a dynamic population
of children revolving through the contaminated residences. This situation will
result in potential exposure of lead to a great number of children without
possibility of detection for lead poisoning. In view of the known consequences
of childhood lead poisoning and the studies that have been done, it is imperative
that we seek to break the cycle that now exists between the treatment and re-
exposure to children by instituting this program.
The proposed program for the abatement of toxic lead contamination would reduce
the incidence of childhood lead poisoning in Alameda County by eliminating a
primary source of environmental lead. The planned program would focus on
achieving the following objectives:
1. Provision of an extensive education program for families impacted by lead.
The education and outreach program will target mainly families with
children less than six (6) years of age residing in dwelling units built
prior to 1978. Other educational activities would target school children,
P.T.A.'s, and community groups.
2. Provision of a referral service to providers for all families with
children potentially exposed to environmental lead for blood lead
screening arid medical case management.
3. Provision of an environmental screening and evaluation of lead
contamination of properties built before 1978, with priority given to the
oldest dwelling units in which young children currently live.
4. Provision of a progressive environmental lead abatement program,
commencing with those properties, which pose an imminent hazard to
children, ages one through six, and which have previously been screened
and evaluated.
3
4
In early October 1990, the Department of Environmental Health invited
representatives of the County's cities and other interested parties to
participate in the further planning and development of this program. This "ad
hoc" task force met several times, and provided input in the form of information,
questions and concerns, which greatly assisted in refining and modifying the
program proposal.
In addition, program presentations were made to individual city representatives,
at our initiation or their request, as well as at meetings with the City Managers
Association, the County's. Waste Management Authority and the Developmental
Disabilities Council, to solicit their interest and support for the program.
FINANCING:
The revised first year's estimated operating cost of the proposed L.E.A.D.
program would be $4,380,000. $3,000,000 of this amount would be for abatement
utilizing private contractors providing employment opportunities for local
residents. Older housing units with the most serious lead contamination would
be abated on a priority basis, utilizing criteria of age, condition, and the
presence of small children. The balance of funding, $1,380,000 would be to
support education and outreach activities, staff inspections of housing, pilot
County-operated abatement projects in certain target areas, coordination, data
gathering, publicity, and other support activities.
The formation of a County Benefit Assessment District effective July 1, 1991,
with the approval of the County's cities, would allow the service to be
financially self-sufficient through the levy of a special benefit asessment. It
is estimated that an assessment of $10 per pre-1978 constructed housing unit
would be sufficient to finance the Lead Environmental Abatement District for the
first year. No increase in Net County cost would be incurred since ail costs
would be financed by special benefit assessments.
If the finally approved program is less than Countywide (i.e. if certain cities
elect not to participate in this benefit assessment district) , the scope and
financing of the program would need to be modified accordingly.
A detailed listing of the program's proposed 1991-92 staffing and budget
breakdown is outlined in Attachments G-1 and G-2 respectively for your further
information and review.
Yours very truly,
David J. Kears, Director
Health Care Services Agency
JH/GC/cdb
Attachments
TL
cc: Auditor-Controller
County Counsel
4
ALAMEDA COUNTY
HEALTH CARE SERVICES AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
PROPOSED
LEAD ENVIRONMENTAL ABATEMENT PROGRAM
PROGRAM ELEMENTS
EDUCATIONAL REFERRAL OF ABATEMENT OF
OUTREACH CHILDREN SCREENING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
AND FOR SCREENING AND LEAD LEAD y
CASE MANAGEMENT CONTAMINATION CONTAMINATION yy
x
to
z
*Media 'Child Health & Disability *Test Painted Surfaces XRF *Placement of Tenants
*Schools Prevention Program *Inspect Defective Paint *Removal of Lead Paint
'PTA (CHDP) Conditions (scraping-heat treatment-or chemicals)
*Telephone Hotline *Private Providers *Test soil around structure for *Environmental Lead Monitoring
*Mall Notification all (Children's Hospital) Lead (before,during, and after removal)
Pre-1978 Structures *Medl-Cal 'Test tap water for Lead 'Employee Safety and Health Protocols
*Home visits *Prop.99 Fund 'Test suspected Ceramics for Followed
'Multi-lingual Lead *Management of Land Contaminated Soil
*Risk Assessment *Disposal of Lead Contaminated Waste
*Painting Structure
*Return of Tenants
ATTACHMENT "B"
LEAD ENVIRONMENTAL ABATEMENT PROGRAM
I. Statement of Purpose
The purpose of the proposed Lead Environmental Abatement Program would be
to protect the children of Alameda County from the debilitating effects of
lead poisoning.
This plan will provide a summary, objectives, program elements, program
management, budget and legal authority for the management of a
comprehensive program to reduce the potential hazard of lead poisoning to
the children in the County. A plan of action for the formation of a
Special Benefit Assessment District is proposed as the mechanism to
finance the lead abatement program. A County-wide task force representing
cities and community action groups assisted in developing and addressing
the concerns of the citizens about childhood lead poisoning.
II. Summary
Recent 1990's studies demonstrate that the long term effects of childhood
lead poisoning is very disturbing. Dr. Herbert L. Needleman reports that
children who had moderately elevated 'Lead levels in early childhood later
exhibited seven-fold increase in school dropout rate and a six-fold
increase in reading disabilities, and lower final high school class
standing.
Lead poisoning is often viewed as primarily a disease of the poor, wealth
and social status confer no immunity. The Agency for Toxic Substance and
Disease Registry (1988) concluded that children living above the poverty
level comprise the largest category of people in danger of undue exposure.
Childhood lead poisoning is a major public health issue in Alameda County.
The April 1989 Interim Report to the California State Legislature,
Childhood Lead Poisoning in California Causes and Prevention, estimates
there are over two million housing units in California that are
constructed before 1950. These old homes contain lead-based paint that
has proven to be the source for childhood lead poisoning. The housing
stock of Alameda County is largely pre-1974. The State Interim Report
also reported that 19.1% of the children tested in Oakland had blood level
high enough to potentially cause deficiencies in neurcbehaviorial
development.
Childhood lead poisoning is preventable. The implementation of the
L.E.A.D. program would remove the threat of lead poisoning to the children
of Alameda County.
III. Recommendations
The massive amounts of information on lead toxicity, as well as the
children's current exposure levels, reveals a need for an aggressive
program to prevent childhood lead poisoning. This program will provide a
mechanism to stop adding lead to the children's environment, will remove
lead from the areas where they are most exposed, their home, and provide
a feasible financial base to accomplish these goals.
In addition to the consequence of lead exposure in children, research
shows that low levels of lead also exert toxic effects on adults,
including reproductive effects and high blood pressure.
To finance a comprehensive lead abatement program, the County should
approve and implement the establishment of a Special Assessment District
to deal with the problem of childhood lead poisoning. The absence of
regulations for lead abatement in housing makes the formation of a benefit
assessment district a reality for consideration.
A. Objectives
The proposed Lead Environmental Abatement Program would eliminate
the primary source of environmental lead and deal with the imminent
danger of lead exposure for children from the existing housing
stock. The objectives of the program are as follows:
1. Provision of an extensive education program for families
impacted by 'Lead. The education and outreach program will
target mainly families with children less than seven years of
age residing in dwelling unis built prior to 1978. Other
educational activities would target school children, P.T.A.'s,
and Community Groups.
2. Provision of a referral service to providers for all families
with children potentially exposed to environmental lead for
blood lead screening and medical case management.
3. Provision of an environmental screening and evaluation of lead
contamination of properties built before 1978, with priority
given to the oldest dwelling units in which young children
currently .live.
4. Provision of a progressive environmental lead abatement
program, commencing with those properties, which pose an
imminent hazard to children, ages one through six, and which
have previously been screened and evaluated.
B. Program Elements
The program activities are geared to meet and implement the four
objectives of the plan, educational outreach and publicity, referral for
screening and case management, environmental screening for lead
contamination, and abatement of lead contamination.
1. EDUCATIONAL OUTREACH AND PUBLICITY
The focus of the education activity for the program will be on the
medical care provider and the general community. The target areas
will be families that live in homes built prior to 1978.
a. Medical Education:
The Child Health and Disability Prevention Program (CHDP) will
direct efforts to reach and train the medical community. The
training will emphasize detection, prevention and the
treatment of lead poisoning.
. b. Community Education:
Community citizen groups will be contacted to address the
health issues around lead poisoning. The education process
will inform the community of the potential risk and the need
for lead screening. It will also generate community support
for lead poisoning and prevention efforts. County primary
care clinics arid community clinics will inform their patients
of the risks of lead poisoning and the need for screening.
The County Superintendent of Schools will be contacted to
enlist the school districts in parent education. Multilingual
mail notification, media campaign, telephone hotlines and home
visits will be the major effort of the community education
program.
C. Community Outreach:
The Lead Poisoning Outreach Plan for CHDP will focus on
creating awareness of this health problem within the high "risk
target population arid with the CHDP provider network.
Outreach efforts will be coordinated with the existing CHDP
Proposition 99 funded outreach team to maximize staff
resources and community visibility. Special emphasis will be
placed in the known high risk areas and with county and
community programs providing services to the families of
children ages 9 months through 6 years. Community workers
will support the activities of existing health advocacy groups
related to increasing lead screening.
2. REFERRAL FOR SCREENING AND CASE MANAGEMENT
National studies indicate that lead poisoning is not just a problem
of poor children. Children from poorer families are at greater
risk, in part, due to malnutrition. The problem cuts across socio-
economic classes as well as geographical boundaries.
Those identified families with lead poisoning will be advised to
find temporary housing until lead abatement is completed.
3
Logistical and financial assistance for relocation will be sought
from the County Social Services Agency and the City Housing
Authorities.
The County CHDP program will screen and refer children with elevated
blood lead to the L.E.A.D. for environmental screening and abatement
efforts. Private provider, Medi-cal and Proposition 99 Fund
recipients will be referred for screening and medical case
management.
Children's Hospital Medical Center will serve as a regional lead
.poisoning treatment center and will be supported by California
Children's Service. The medical follow-up will be coordinated and
conducted by a nurse case manager out of Children's Hospital. The
regional lead center will provide the following services to
children, screening by CHDP:
a) Centralized referral system;
b) Comprehensive intake evaluation including
laboratory work;
c) CCS Referral;
d) Home visits to develop a nursing plan;
e) Treatment and follow-up as needed;
f) Planning session with County Environmental
Health for education and prevention efforts:
3. ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING FOR LEAD CONTAMINATION
The focus of the environmental evaluation will be in the homes built
before 1978. Most children are exposed to lead as a result of its
presence in paint, dirt, plumbing, gasoline and other products.
In September 1977, the use of 'Lead paint in housing was banned. The
ban was imposed by regulation issued by the Consumer Product Safety
Administration.
Recent studies indicate that the primary exposure route of lead
exposure is from the lead paint transformation into ordinary
household dust. Children absorb lead by playing in the dust that is
contaminated with particles of paint. The children get dust
particles on their clothes and hands and into their mouths.
A list of all homes and dwelling units constructed before 1978 will
be the basis for the environmental screening activity of the
program. The identified child with lead poisoning will be matched
to the pre-1978 housing list and the unit will get priority for
evaluation. Each. case of lead poisoning will require a home visit
and environmental sampling to determine the source of lead.
4
The home visit will investigate protential sources of lead in the
child's environment:
a) The painted interior and exterior surfaces of the dwelling.
b) The soil around the dwelling.
c) Suspected ceramic tableware in the home.
d) The tap water from copper pipes in the home.
The Portable X-Ray Fluorescent Lead Analyzer (XRF) is used to
determine possible lead sources on the flat chewable painted
surfaces of the dwelling unit. When the lead source is identified,
education information on safe lead abatement_ guidelines will be
provided to the home residence.
If the source of lead is lead-based paint, the family is advised to
obtain temporary housing until abatement is fully completed.
Families are advised to remain out of dwellings until lead
contamination abatement of the housing has been confirmed.
4. ABATEMENT OF .LEAD CONTAMINATION
Removing lead paint from homes is riot an easy task. Lead removal
involves testing surfaces for lead, replacing, encapsulating or
removal of paint from woodwork or wail surfaces arid the careful
cleanup of all dust generated during the process. Post removal
testing is necessary to ensure that the cleanup was done in a proper
.manner. Some of the removal operation can exacerbate the 'Lead
problem, therefore, lead removal require's skilled 'Labor and special
equipment such as respirators arid special vacuum cleaners.
Lead based paint was also used on exterior walls and surfaces.
Particles from exterior paint along with airborne lead from gasoline
has settled in the dirt around the house. This soil also presents
a potential hazard to children.
The federal register of April 18, 1990 has published guidelines from
the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Lead Based Paint:
Interim guidelines for Hazardous Identification and Abatement in
Public, and Indian Housing. These detailed guidelines will be
followed in abating the pre-1978 dwelling units. The dwelling unit
hazard abatement system has the following system approach:
a) Field testing for lead-based paint using the portable XRF
b) Documentation and reporting
5
c) Abatement strategies; replacement, encapsulation and paint
removal
d) Abatement worker education and training
e) Worker protection
f) Clean-up
g) Waste disposal
The abatement of lead based paint should be done when there are no
children or pregnant women on the premises. Temporary housing
should be obtained while lead abatement is done.
The removal of lead based paint will be accomplished by scraping,
heat treatment (Infra-Red or Coil Type Gun) or chemical treatment.
Machine sanding or the use of propane torches will not be permitted.
C. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
The priority for the management of this program will .focus on the
group that currently has the highest exposure to lead and
susceptability to its effects. Children living in homes with
deteriorating lead-based paints are at the greatest risk of
ingesting undue amounts of lead. .
The L.E.A.D. program will be structured to maximize three program
elements (educational outreach and publicity, referral for screening
and case management, environmental screening for lead contamination)
during the first year. The abatement of imminent hazard dwellings
will also be conducted in the first year. Imminent hazard dwelling
is any dwelling that has identified toxic lead contamination with a
resident population of children ages zero to six years.
To achieve the purpose of this program the Department of
Environmental Health (DEH) will be the lead county agency and
coordinate all of the activities of the program. The program will
be structured so that the first area addressed will be those
children that have been identified as having lead poisoning and
those in the high risk area.
The DEH will coordinate the activities of several agencies to assist
in education, social service, and financial assistance. The
following agencies will be contacted for assistance:
1. Children's Hospital Medical Center
2. City Housing Authority
3. Community Citizen's Group
6
4. County Social Services Agency
5. Department of Housing and Urban Renewal
IV. COUNTY SERVICE AREA
The purpose of the County Service Area is to establish an adequate level
of funding to provide a comprehensive progam to protect the children from
the effects of lead poisoning. In order to obtain equitable services of
lead abatement a Courity Service Area must be created. To finance the
County Service Area an equitable assessment unit must be established. The
benedit assessment units will be established in cooperation with the
County 'Assessor's office.
The benefit assessment units for the County are as follows:
a. Type of Properties
b. Number of Parcels
c. Equivalent Benefit Assessment Units
d. Number of Benefit Assessment Units
V. LEGAL AUTHORITY
The County Service Area Law, Section 25210.1 et. seq. of the Government
Code enables the Board of Supervisors to create a County Service Area for
miscellaneous extended services, and to finance the service area with a
benefit assessment.
Cities may be included in the County Service Area by majority vote of each
city council using one of three processes:
1. A majority of vote of council members only.
2. A majority vote preceded by a public advisory election.
3. A majority vote to be followed by a binding confirmation
election.
In consultations with the cities, it is recommended that process No. 1 (a
majority vote of the city councils) be utilized for implementation of the County
Service Area.
GC/cdb
la
7
ATf'ACIMENrI' "C"
Illustration of the
Potential Risk of Childhood Lead Poisoning
in Alameda County
444,566
Table 1 •
y 40o k County 364,570' '
` 19sa No. of Dwelling Units
M 300 k
>Pre
C : 1970
O
3
178,617'
17
so0
k
O
:?;Built
O
?'Pre
Z00
1 k <1950
T n 8uift
CD Pre
N > 1950
r Qr
C
L 3 5o Built 33,300 .
'n Pre
,c m 1970
Total
c .n County
Z � 1980 70,494 *'
Table 2
No. of Children Ages 0 - 6
85,962 Inhabiting Dwelling Units
100
* Dwelling units built prior to 1970 in Alameda County may pose a higher
risk of exposure to toxic lead. Children of ages 0 - 6 years are most
vulnerable to this exposure.
* Estimate based on (children ages 0-6 /Pre-1950 dwelling units) Ratio.
All data from State Department of Finance.
LEAD-9/25190 mfk
ATI'ACHME2H "D"
Projected
Cumulative Population of Children
Ages. 0 - 6, Revolving through
Lead Contaminated Dwellings
1980 - 2000
Table 3
200
i 166,500
1550 133,200
U
o �
O O -'99,900
z 0 100 k
0
> Q
r 66,600
_ca
50 k
E 33,300
U
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Year
LEAD-9/25/90 mfk
ATTACHMENT "E"
Distribution of Pre - 1950 Dwelling Units and
Estimated No. of Children (Ages 0-6)
by Supervisory District
5
4
3 - -
1
2
(graphics not to scale)
Supervisory Number of Pre-1950 Number of Children in
District Dwelling Units Pre-50 Dwelling Units
1 4,997 929
2 11,369 2,114
3 59,097 10,992
4 661006 127277
5 34,195 6,360
* Estimate based on Children Ages 0-6 / Pre-1950 Dwelling Units Ratio
LEAD-9/25190 mflc
ATI'ACHNM
' Ala. a County - Health care ServicE gency
Department of Environeinental Health
Medical and Educational Costs of
Childhood Lead Poisoning Compared to
Proactive Prevention
$43,357
.................
.................
.................
$40 $39,557
Medical + Remedial Education
Ni
Remedial Education
t
$30
U
ca a
o Medical Treatment ($3,800)
U �
y+ ti
a lus
Remedial Education (579,557)
g � Reme ..:
-a $20
ow
♦ therapy ($4,957) ^"
♦ grade retention ($2,738)
W 9
o -a ♦ pre-school ($9,564)
• head start m,400)
d •
early intervention ($2,800)
♦ special education (114,098) ?;
M.
>; :; ,<
$10
Medical
Treatment :>: t
$3)800 .........
v
s4ci ioa' r.
$0
Cost of Lead Abatement
per Dwelling Unit
$6,000
$10
Source: "A Silent and Costly Epidemic"; a-report by the Conservation Law
Foundation of New England, Inc.; July 1987
LEAD-11/2a/90 mfk
ATTACHMENT G-1
PROPOSED ADDITIONAL POSITIONS AND
PAY UNITS FOR 1991-92 LEAD PROGRAM
ITEM NUMBER OF
NO. CLASS TITLE POs. PAY UNITS AMOUNT*
(New) Chief, Lead Program 1 12 $69,576
0222M Administrative Services Asst. 1 12 42,084
0305M Program Specialist 1 12 46,380
1128 Specialist Clerk 2 24 48,792
5650 Hazardous Materials Specialist 2 24 102,120
5655 Senior Hazardous Materials
Specialist 1 12 57,816
5781 Health Educator II 1 12 36,684
5981 Public Health Nursing
Assistant II** 3 36 69,516
9240 Painter (Lead Abatement
Specialist) 6 72 255,498***
Total 18 216 $728,466
Less Salary Savings (10%) (72,846)
$655,620
Pius Employee Benefits (260) 170,460
Total Salaries & Benefits $826,080
* Based on salaries in effective 12/21/90
** Positions to be used as. "Community Outreach Workers"
*** Same salary as "Painter" classification plus 10%
for "hazardous duty"
JH/cdb
r
ATTACHMENT G- 2
1991-92 ESTIMATED ANNUAL
OPERATING BUDGET FOR PROPOSED L.E.A.D. PROGRAM
Amount
Salaries & Benefits
Salaries & Wages $655,620
Employee Benefits 170,460
Total $826,080
Services & Supplies
Clothing (Protective) Supplies $ 6,000
Paint and related supplies (for
County-operated pilot abatement
program) 50,000
Contract abatement services 3,000,000
Liability Insurance costs 75,000
Small Tools & Instruments 25,000
Miscellaneous office supplies
and expenses 20,000
Publicity educational and outreach
related costs 60,000
Office equipment and furnishings 101,000
Administrative overhead support
costs 120,000
Leased office space rental 80,000
Transportation 5,000
Special Departmental expense 52,920
Total $3,481,520
Fixed Assets (Equipment) 50,000
GRAND TOTAL $4,380,000
JH/cdb
GT
RECEIVED
JAN 1 r '1951
BRIEFS FROM THE ALAMEDA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, 1/15/91 CITY OF DUBLIN
CONTACT: Marty Boyer
Public Affairs, 272-6984
• Board approved in principle the Health Care Services Agency' s proposal for
a lead abatement program, to be funded through a special benefit assessment
on homes in Alameda County built before 1978. It is these older homes that
are most likely to be painted with lead-based paint that can poison
occupants -- especially children who tend to put paint chips in their
mouths.
Board authorized the agency to proceed developing the program and
assessment district in conjunction with cities, and to hold hearings in
March.
Under the program, houses would have lead-based paint removed and be
repainted with safe products. Each house abated would cost from $3,000 to
$6,000, according to the plan. The proposal at this point suggests that a
$1 ,000 subsidy would be applied to each house 'abated, with the homeowner
bearing the balance of the cost, although a financing program will be
sought to help those who cannot afford the cost.
Estimates are that there are about 438,000 houses in the county constructed
before 1978 and some 81 ,000 children living in them. Those homes with
young children most at-risk would be first priority for abatement.
The program would raise a budget of $4.38 million through assessments of
$10 per dwelling for the life of the project.
CONTACT: Rafat Shahid, Environmental Health Director, 273-4313
• A summary report shows that the County is currently making use of 97 grants
in providing programs and services, valued at $38.4 million. The County is
contributing $1 .6 million toward these programs as part of the grant
agreements, and getting another $4.3 million from other contributors.
In his report, County Administrator Steve Szalay points out that grants
certainly are no- the ultimate solution to county financing problems, but
are an essential element in our funding portfolio that allow us to provide
critical services that have no other funding source.
A review of our grant operations show that we have greatly improved our
ability to coordinate and monitor our grants, and Alameda County staff is
widely recognized for its proficiency in applying for and winning grants.
CONTACT: Don Graff, County Administrator' s Office, 272-6984
• Board also approved a local vendor ordinance, granting a 5 percent
preference to local vendors on County contracts except those subject to
State low-bid laws, such as major construction projects.
CONTACT: Darlene Smith, GSA Director, 530-9660
Kelvin Booty, County Counsel , 272-7600
Eh BIT 3
i
i
• The Board declared a state of emergency as a result of a minimum of $2
million damage done during the freeze last month. The damage figure so far
includes only damages assessed in the cut flower and nursery business, and
may go higher, Supervisor Campbell noted in proposing the declaration.
CONTACT: Supervisor Ed Campbell , 272-6691 .
• Supervisors also passed a resolution proposed by Supervisor Warren Widener
opposing the use of force in the Middle East. Supervisors said they would
send the resolution and cover letter to the President, Congressional
leaders, and all the California delegation urging the United States to use
all means available short of force to resolve the conflict.
• Supervisor Charlie Santana voted against the measure, and Supervisor Ed
Campbell abstained.
CONTACT: Supervisor Warren Widener, 272-6695
The Board approved in principle the proposed County-operated Lead Abatement
Pro ram and its proposed special benefit assessment, district financing
g
mechanism. The Board also scheduled a work session for March 19, 1991 at 0:
a.m. and a public hearing for April 23, 1991 at 10:00 a.m.
J Questions from the Board focused on the following concerns:
1. Explore the feasibility of awarding the full $6,000 grant to low income
homeowners.
2. Study the possibility of a scale of $10, $20 or $30 benefit assessment
based on the three levels of the assessor s housing unit. valuation.
3. Explore the concept of ' not imposing Assessors "penalty" through an
increased valuation assessment for improving property by any lead
abatement work.
4. Explore a private finance program with the banks and lending institutions
that, do business with the County to provide below market rates for loans
to abate homes.
5. Develop a legislative strategy to seek support for abatement cost, i.e.
excise tax on paint.
6. Study an assessment mechanism for multi-unit buildings, i.e. apartment
houses.
7. Develop a sunset clause for the program. Specify a time to stop the
abatement program.
8. Identify the County's administrative cost for the abatement program.
9. Identify what the owner gets for the $10 assessment.
10. Identify how the abated lead material be handled and where will it be
stored, transported and disposed?
GC/cdb
BOSLD
H I B IT 7Z'
ALAMEDA COUNTY HEALTH CARE SERVICES AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
LEAD
DISTRIBUTION OF
PRE-1950 / PRE-1978 DWELLING UNITS AND
ESTIMATED NO. OF CHILDREN (AGES 0-6)
BY SUPERVISORY DISTRICTS
SUPERVISORY DISTRICT NO. OF DWELLINGS ESTIMATED N0.}OF CHILDREN
PRE-1950 PRE-17 PRE-1 PRE-1978
1 DUBLIN 882 4,098 164 764
FREMONT 1 ,932 42,479 360 7,901
LIVERMORE 1 ,812 16,461 338 3,068
PLEASANTON 371 11 ,320 69 2,110
2 NEWARK 434 9,104 81 1 ,697
UNION CITY 678 11 ,836 126 2,206
HAYWARD 9,533 34,786 1 ,777 6,484
SAN LORENZO 724 7,326 135 1 ,366
ASHLAND 2,155 6,189 400 1 ,151
3 ALAMEDA 13,790 27,250 2,564 5,079
1/2 OAKLAND 45,307 74,662 8,445 13,917
4 CASTRO VALLEY 1 ,634 17,425 304 3,248
1/20AKLAND 45,307 74,662 8,445 13,917
PIEDMONT 3,080 3,827 574 724
SAN LEANDRO 15,985 27,307 2,979 5,090
5 ALBANY 3,053 7,023 569 1 ,309
BERKELEY 30,224 46,165 5,634 8,586
EMERYVILLE 918 2,397 171 447
*ESTIMATE BASED ON PRE-1950/PRE-1978 DWELLING UNITS / CHILDREN (AGES 0-6)
Figures based on 1980 Census data
Lead 25 11/14M Ih 10
E H I B 5
j
Leading Poisoning 1973-1990
8
y 6
c
0
a�
a�
E
Q
E- 4
a�
0
0
m
E
= 2
0
73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
Year
H 6
Leading Poisoning 1973-1990
CDC
8
State
6
N
0
N
N
E
a
�. 4
N
O
2
O
m
E
3
Z
2
0
73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
Year
M
Lead Poisoning at CHO: Age and Race
10
8
Black
N
6 ® Asian
N
c4
U
w
0
L Hispanic
a�
E
Z 4 ® Indian
❑ Unknown
2
0
0-1 1 -2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9
Age, yrs
1
Alameda County Health Care Services Agency
Department of Environmental Health '-
Lead Environmental Abatement Program
Proposed Abatement Progress Profile*
500 k
438 k
V/�/// Environmental screening would
400 k determine an estimated 25%of units to
25% be lead-based paint free.
,N 300 k
Abatement progress 1992,93: 3,000 units per year
Years 1994-2014 = 15,000 units per year***
� C
D7 O
v-
— O 75%
- O
U IN
ctY
a�
a�
.a
200
.Q
3
a�
E
0
zco c�
ti —
Q
T
t
i.. 100 k
a
F7M
'92 '94 '96 '98 2000 '02 '04 '06 '08 10 12 14
Abatement Timeline
* Based on an average cost of$6000/dwelling and $1000 program subsidy.
" Based on report to Congress, Dec 7, 1990, Dept. of HUD, "Comprehensive and Workable Plan
for the Abatement of Lead Based Paint in Privately Owned Housing which indicates an
estimated 75% of pre-1980 constructed dwelling units have lead based paint.
*'* Contingent upon enactment of a future proposed exise tax on paint, sufficient to generate
funds to provide $4 of matching monies for every county dollar spent on abatement.
LEAD-AbateProflte 7!3!90 mtk
EXHIBIT 7