Richmond council approves consultant‑led community process for $550M Chevron settlement, keeps funds invested during planning

The Richmond City Council voted to engage a third‑party consultant to design and conduct an inclusive community engagement process to develop a framework for expenditure of new general fund revenues from the Chevron polluters‑pay settlement and to solicit input on strategies for holding and releasing those funds.

Councilmember Claudia Jimenez moved the measure and Vice Mayor Robinson seconded. The motion included an explicit instruction that the settlement funds remain invested while the community process proceeds. Mayor Martinez announced the final tally: the motion passed, with Councilmember Brown voting no and Councilmember Bonner (recorded as Bana/Bonner in the transcript) abstaining.

Council and staff framed the decision as a response to repeated community appeals for meaningful participation in how settlement funds will be used. "This $550 million settlement is a once‑in‑a‑generation opportunity to repair harm, meet people's everyday needs and plan for a just transition away from fossil‑fuel dependence," Vice Mayor Robinson said during the discussion. Multiple community organizations — including APEN, Communities for a Better Environment (CBE), ACE and labor groups — urged the council to adopt a process that reaches frontline residents, unhoused people and non‑English speakers. Emma Ishii of the Asian Pacific Environmental Network said the funds should be used to "both fully fund crucial neighborhood improvements and help build a just economy independent of the fossil fuel industry." Francisco Ortiz of United Teachers of Richmond urged prioritizing community schools and wraparound services for students.

Several council members and staff warned the council to be careful about process design, timeline and staff capacity. Deputy Director of Finance Mubin (presented on the record) told council that core budget staff are already heavily tasked with preparing the fiscal year budget and recommended a consultant to ensure a scientifically sound and inclusive community survey and engagement plan; he estimated that staff would need additional time or consultant support to deliver a rigorous process.

Council debate focused on three concerns: (1) the need for a rigorous technical analysis of strategy options (for example, whether to invest the principal and spend interest, bond, or spend down over time) before soliciting community preferences; (2) ensuring outreach reaches unhoused residents, elders, non‑English speakers and those who cannot attend daytime meetings; and (3) budget and timeline constraints for procurement and contract management. Councilmembers asked staff to return with a recommended timeline and a draft RFP for council review in March showing how the engagement and any required technical analyses would proceed.

The city manager confirmed the settlement funds are currently invested and earning interest. Council added a staff directive that, while the engagement process runs, funds remain in an investment vehicle consistent with council investment policies so the city can earn interest rather than treating them as immediately available general fund dollars.

What’s next: staff will prepare a Request for Proposals for consultant services and present an updated timeline and scope in March. The council emphasized that the RFP and the contract will be brought back for council review before a consultant begins community outreach.

Funding context and clarifications: multiple speakers described the settlement as roughly $550,000,000 and referenced an expected initial annual distribution figure of about $50,000,000 for the first several years; staff and council characterized those figures as the basis for evaluating long‑term strategy but noted that final amounts and timing are subject to accounting, investment earnings and legal restrictions.