Chapter 6 

Consultation and 

Coordination with Others 
183

The Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park General Management Plan /

Environmental Assessment represents the

contributions from cooperating park partners;

participants in local community workshops, public

meetings and other organized forums; government

agencies that are local, regional, and national; and

public comments gathered at public workshops and

through newsletters that included e-mails, letters,

and response cards. More that 300 different types of

consultation, coordination, informational meetings

among the community, agencies, and the public were

vitally important throughout the planning process in

the development of this new national historical park.

COOPERATING PARTNERS 

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park is conceived as a

collaboration between public and private entities to

preserve and share the sites, structures, and stories

of the World War II home front. The cooperating

partners are working to establish this national

historical park, to achieve success and mutual

benefit, and to carry out the park’s legislated

mandates. Throughout the planning process, the

cooperating partners have evolved to include

citizens, communities, private entities, governmental

entities, and nonprofit organizations that share

common goals in the effort to pursue, secure, and

interpret the resources of the national historical

park. This collaborative nature has required a

commitment of all the partners to building and

sustaining relationships. The continuous and

dynamic conversations that have resulted have truly

fostered a partnership park that includes individuals

and groups who are able to tell their own stories at

park sites and to encourage others throughout the

greater Richmond and Bay Area communities to do

so, too. 

The National Park Service hosted or participated in

more than 240 meetings with officials, decisionmakers, and committees. Most of these meetings

involved the participation of members and staff of

the National Park Service; the City of Richmond; the

Mayor’s office; the Port of Richmond; Richmond

Community and Economic Development; and other

city departments, committees, and commissions.

Other local cooperating partners include Contra

Costa County, the Richmond Museum Association,

Rosie the Riveter Trust, Levin Shipping, the Council

of Industries, and the owner of the Ford Assembly

Building.

In addition to the above meetings, the

superintendent of Rosie the Riveter/World War II

Home Front National Historical Park and staff

organized more than 25 planning and informational

meetings with citizens associated with local business

and nonprofit organizations such as the Council of

Industries, the Richmond Chamber of Commerce,

the Richmond Convention and Visitors Bureau, the

Western County Business and Professional

Association, the Point Richmond Businessmen’s

Association, Atchison Village, and the League of

Women Voters. The National Park Service also

coordinated meetings with the managers or staff of

county and regional governments including Contra

Costa County, the San Francisco Bay Conservation

and Development Commission, the California

Coastal Commission, the San Francisco Bay Area

Water Transit Authority, and the San Francisco Bay

Trail. 

During the planning process, a total of nine

workshops were organized with cooperating

partners and other subject-matter experts. The

following workshops were instrumental in building a

vision for the national historical park: (1) a

workshop on preparing for the general management

planning process; (2) a workshop on defining the

park’s foundation; (3) a visioning charrette for

Richmond Shipyard No. 3; (4) three workshops in

developing alternative visions for the new park; (5) a

visioning charrette for the World War II Home Front

Visitor / Education Center; and 6) a workshop on

developing interpretive themes for Shipyard No. 3.

Public 

Involvement
PUBLIC MEETINGS AND NEWSLETTERS

Public meetings and newsletters were used to

involve the public in the planning for Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park. A “Notice of Intent” to prepare the

environmental impact statement for Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical

Park General Management Plan was published the

March 26, 2002, Federal Register (page 13801). A

“Notice of Intent” is the first announcement that the

public is invited to participate in planning for a

national park system unit.

In July 2002, a press release and other

announcements were distributed inviting the public

to participate in the first public meeting for

developing the general management plan. To support

the meetings, the first planning newsletter was

prepared, with input from cooperating partners, and

distributed throughout the San Francisco Bay Area.

The National Park Service held 8 public meetings

throughout the San Francisco Bay area in the cities

of Richmond, Oakland, San Francisco, Vallejo, and

Palo Alto. More than 2,300 newsletters were mailed

to individuals on the park mailing list and distributed

at the public meetings and at other community

events. Participants at each of these first public

scoping meetings provided the planning team with

their thoughts for the new park, concerns that

should be addressed, and ideas for interpretive

themes. The public meetings also provided the

public with an opportunity to begin sharing their

Rosie the Riveter and World War II home front

stories and experiences. 

A second planning newsletter was prepared and

distributed in November 2003. This newsletter

provided the public with the opportunity to

comment on the park foundation that the planning

team and cooperating partners had developed. A

park foundation defines the park purpose, describes

the park significance, identifies mandates and

constraints, lists the primary interpretive themes,

and includes the issues that the general management

plan would address. A total of 3,000 newsletters

were printed, mailed, and distributed at various park

events. Comment cards were included to encourage

public comments.

In October, 2004, a third newsletter was printed and

11,100 copies were distributed by mail; another 900

were distributed at public meetings and other

community events. This newsletter presented the

public with four alternative visions for the new park

and invited interested individuals to attend the two

public meetings in Oakland and three in Richmond

during November 2004. Comment cards were

included in each newsletter. The planning team

received 232 letters by mail and e-mail.

A total of 103 people participated in the five public

meetings held in California. Public feedback on the

alternatives included likes and dislikes associated

with each potential park vision. Feedback from these

public involvement activities affirmed that

alternatives A, B, and C provided an appropriate

range of future park visions. A fourth alternative,

alternative D, proposed to preserve the structures

and sites through adaptive use; visitors would be

exposed to the historic settings through involvement

in a high density of contemporary activities relating

to commerce, culture, arts, education, and

community services. Generally, this alternative

required actions that were beyond the control of the

National Park Service. Park and planning staff also

believed that alternative D strayed outside the

boundaries of the park purpose and significance, as

well. Therefore it was dismissed from further

consideration. The tone of the public meetings and

comments were very supportive of establishing the

national historical park and the level of interest in

making the park succeed continues to rise.

Following the initial environmental analysis on May

7, 2007, the National Park Service published in the

Federal Register a “Notice of Termination” of the

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the

General Management Plan, Rosie the Riveter/World

War II Home Front National Historical Park,

Richmond, California. As the general management

plan evolved, the National Park Service had

determined that an environmental assessment rather

than an environmental impact statement would be

the appropriate environmental documentation for

this plan. 

184

CHAPTER 6: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION WITH OTHERS
During the preparation of this plan, the various

superintendents and members of the planning team

met and consulted with various entities regarding the

general management plan, as follows:

CITY OF RICHMOND,CALIFORNIA

Mayor’s Office

Mayor Gayle McLaughlin

Mayor Irma Anderson (former)

Mayor Rosemary Corbin (former)

Richmond City Council Members

Nathaniel Bates

Charles Belcher (former)

Gary Bell (former)

Thomas K. Butt

Richard Griffin (former)

Ludmyrna Lopez

John E. Marquez, Vice Mayor

Mindell L. Penn (former)

Jim Rogers 

Tony Thurmond

Harpreet S. Sandhu

Maria Viramontes 

City Manager's Office

City Manager Bill Lindsay

City Manager Isiah Turner (former)

Acting City Manager and Assistant City Manager 

Jay Corey (former) 

Assistant City Manager Leslie Knight

Deputy City Manager Leveron Bryant (former)

Art and Culture Commission

Community and Economic Development

Redevelopment Agency

Housing Authority

Historic Preservation Advisory Committee

Neighborhood Councils

Parks and Landscaping Division 

Planning and Building Services

Port of Richmond

Recreation and Parks Commission

Richmond General Plan Advisory 

Committee

185

Consultation with Other

Agencies, Officials and 

Organizations
OTHER AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS,

AND INDIVIDUALS

Association of Bay Area Governments

(ABAG) – San Francisco Bay Area Trail

Project

Atchison Village (Board Representatives)

California Coastal Conservancy

California State Historic 

Preservation Office

Canada Mortgage and Housing

Corporation – Granville Island

Contra Costa County

Council of Industries

East Bay Regional Park District

Greater Richmond Interfaith Program

Kaiser Permanente

Levin Shipping

National Park Foundation

National Trust for Historic Preservation 

Northern California Muslim Association

Nystrom Urban Revitalization Effort

(NURVE)

Orton Development, Inc

Point Richmond Business Association

Richmond Museum of History

Richmond Museum Association

SS Red Oak Victory Executive Committee

Rosie the Riveter Trust (Board Members)

San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit

Authority

San Francisco Bay Conservation and

Development Commission 

Trails for Richmond Action Committee 

(Trac)

West County Council of Industries

West County Contra Costa County Unified 

School District

West County Business and Professional 

Association

186

CHAPTER 6: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION WITH OTHERS
187

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

SECTION 7 CONSULTATION WITH U.S.

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

During the preparation of the general management

plan, NPS staff contacted the Sacramento,

California, office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service to begin the consultation process and obtain

a list of threatened and endangered species. A

consultation letter and list of threatened and

endangered species and species of concern was

received from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on

May 16, 2003 (see appendix D). 

In accordance with the Endangered Species Act and

relevant regulations at 50 CFR Part 402, the National

Park Service determined that this general

management plan is not likely to adversely affect any

federally listed threatened or endangered species

and will send a copy of this draft management plan

to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with a request

for written concurrence with this determination. 

In addition, the National Park Service has

committed to consult on future actions conducted

under the framework described in this management

plan to ensure that such actions are not likely to

adversely affect threatened or endangered species or

species of concern.

SECTION 106 CONSULTATION WITH

STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE

Agencies that have direct or indirect jurisdiction

over historic properties are required by Section 106

of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as

amended, to take into account the effect of any

undertaking on properties eligible for listing in the

National Register of Historic Places. To meet the

requirements of 36 CFR 800, the National Park

Service has sent a letter to the California state

historic preservation officer, and the Advisory

Council on Historic Preservation on June 2, 2003,

inviting their participation in the planning process.

Newsletters associated with this plan were sent to

each of these offices. On November 18, 2004, the

National Park Service sent a letter to the California

state historic preservation officer offering to

schedule a meeting with his staff and inviting

participation in public meetings that were held in

Oakland and Richmond on November

30–December 2, 2004.

Under the terms of 1995 programmatic agreement

among the National Park Service, the Advisory

Council on Historic Preservation, and the National

Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers,

the National Park Service, in consultation with the

state historic preservation office, will make a

determination about which undertakings are

programmatic exclusions and which require further

compliance (see table 24).

CONSULTATION WITH NATIVE 

AMERICANS

Letters were sent to the following Native American

groups on October 10, 2003, inviting their

participation in the general management plan

planning process: Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe,

Costanoan-Rumsen Carmel Tribe, The Ohone

Indian Tribe, Costanoan Ohlone-Rumsem-Mutsun

Tribe, Ohlone/Costanoan-Esselen Nation, Indian

Canyon Band of Costanoan/Mutsun, and

Amah/Mutsun Band of Ohlone/Costanoan Indians. 

Subsequently, newsletters associated with this plan

were sent to these groups. In addition, letters were

sent to the following Native American Indian groups

on June 17, 2005, inviting their participation in the

planning process: Scotts Valley Band of Pomo

Indians, Guidiville Rancheria. 

FUTURE COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS

The National Park Service will submit to the

California state historic preservation office for

review, any federal actions or financial support

associated with the following undertakings affecting

historic resources at Rosie the Riveter/World War II

Home Front National Historical Park:

 ground disturbing activities resulting from

development of facilities to support visitor
188

CHAPTER 6: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION WITH OTHERS

access, services, and interpretation

 rehabilitation of exteriors of historic structures

or buildings

 rehabilitation of portions of interiors of historic

structures or buildings

 adaptive use of interiors of historic structures

or buildings for park administration or

operations and nonpark-related purposes

 potential changes to land use, circulation, and

building patterns and overall spatial

organization resulting from development of

facilities to support visitor access, services, and

interpretation
CITY AND COUNTY GOVERNMENTS

City of Richmond

Gayle McLaughlin, Mayor

Nathaniel Bates, Vice Mayor

Thomas K. Butt, Councilmember

Ludmyrna Lopez, Councilmember

John E. Marquez, Councilmember

Jim Rogers, Councilmember

Tony Thurmond, Councilmember

Harpreet S. Sandhu, Councilmember

Maria Viramontes, Councilmember

Richmond Boards and Commissions

Art and Culture Commission

Historic Preservation Advisory Committee

Recreation and Parks Commission

General Plan Advisory Committee

Richmond Neighborhood Councils

Richmond Neighborhood Coordinating Committee

Atchison Village Neighborhood Council

Coronado Neighborhood Council

Cortez/Stege Neighborhood Council

East Richmond Neighborhood Council

Eastshore Neighborhood Council

Fairmede Hilltop Neighborhood Council

Greenbriar Neighborhood Council

Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council

Hilltop Neighborhood Council

Laurel Park Neighborhood Council

Marina Bay Neighborhood Council

May Valley Neighborhood Council

North & East Neighborhood Council

Panhandle Annex Neighborhood Council

Parchester Village Neighborhood Council

Park Plaza Neighborhood Council

Parkview Neighborhood Council

Point Richmond Neighborhood Council

Pullman Neighborhood Council

Quail Hill Neighborhood Council

Richmond Annex Neighborhood Council

Richmond Heights Neighborhood Council

Richmore Village Neighborhood Council

Santa Fe Neighborhood Council

Shields-Reid Neighborhood Council

SW Richmond Annex Neighborhood Council

Richmond City Departments

City Manager

Administrative Chief

Assistant City Manager/Human Resources 

Management Director

Building Regulations

City Attorney

City Clerk

City Engineer

Economic Development

Confidential Investigative and Appeals Officer

Economic Development

Engineering

Finance 

Fire Department

Housing Authority

Housing and Community Development

Library and Community Services 

Operations and Maintenance

Parks and Public Facilities

Planning and Building Services

Police Commission

Police Department

Port Operations

Public Works

Recreation Commission

Recreation Division

Redevelopment Agency

Richmond Memorial Convention Center

Board of Supervisors, Contra Costa 

County, California

John M. Gioia, District I 

Gayle B. Uilkema, District II 

Mary N. Piepho, Chair, District III

Susan Bonilla, District IV 

Federal D. Glover, District V 

Contra Costa County Departments

John Cullen, County Administrator

Administration

Administrative Services Officer

Assistant County Administrator

189

Agencies, Organizations, and

Individuals Receiving A Copy

of this Document
Building Inspection Department

Capital Facilities and Debt Management

Capital Projects Management

Community Development Department

Community Services

Facilities Maintenance

General Services Department

Health& Welfare, Special Districts & General 

Government

Office of Communications & Media

Public Safety & Finance

U.S. SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES

Honorable Barbara Boxer, U.S. Senator

Honorable Diane Feinstein, U.S. Senator

Honorable George Miller, U.S. House of

Representatives

FEDERAL AGENCIES

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

U.S. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Indian Affairs

National Park Service

Golden Gate National Recreation Area

San Francisco Maritime National

Historical Park

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Sacramento Office

U.S Environmental Protection Agency

STATE OFFICIALS

Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor of California

Don Perata, State Senator

Tom Torlakson, State Senator

Loni Hancock, Assembly Member

STATE AGENCIES

Air Resources Board 

California Coastal Conservancy

California Environmental Protection Agency

California State Historic Preservation Officer

California Department of Transportation District 4

Office of Historic Preservation 

Department of Conservation, Office of Land 

Conservation

Resources Agency

Department of Fish and Game 

Department of Parks and Recreation 

Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 

Department of Water Resources 

State Water Resources Control Board

California State Parks, Sacramento Headquarters

AMERICAN INDIAN GROUPS

Amah/Mutsun Band of Ohlone/Costanoan Indians

Costanoan Ohlone-Rumsem-Mutsun Tribe

Costanoan-Rumsen Carmel Tribe

Indian Canyon Band of Costanoan/Mutsun

Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe

Ohone Indian Tribe

Ohlone/Costanoan-Esselen Nation

Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians, Guidiville 

Rancheria

ORGANIZATIONS AND BUSINESSES

Association of Bay Area Government

Atchison Village

Council of Industries

East Bay Regional Parks District

Greater Richmond Interfaith Program

Historian Donna Graves

Historian Steve Gilford

Kaiser Permanente

Levin Shipping

National Park Foundation

National Parks Conservation Association

National Trust for Historic Preservation

Northern California Muslim Association

Nystrom Urban Revitalization Effort

Orton Development, Inc

Point Richmond Business Association

Richmond Chamber of Commerce

Richmond Museum Association

Richmond Museum of History

Rosie the Riveter Trust

San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority

San Francisco Bay Conservation and 

Development Commission 

The Sierra Club, San Francisco Bay Chapter

TRAC – Trails for Richmond Action Committee

West County Business and Professional Association

INDIVIDUALS

The list of individuals is available from park

headquarters.

190

CHAPTER 6: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION WITH OTHERS