Hillcrest Summit Apartments Overall Site Plan. Source: City of Antioch
Forced to approve by state law, but without any changes to project since denying it in April
“The City will not have financial or legal obligation regarding the repayment of the debt.” – Planning Manager Zoe Merideth. But City will receive $15K in bond fees.
Freitas again rants against project saying, “It’s ugly.”
By Allen D. Payton
After denying public financing for the Hillcrest Summit Apartments on a 2-2-1 vote in April, the Antioch City Council changed course and voted 5-0 to approve it during their meeting on June 23, 2026. That’s despite the developer not making any changes to address concerns of the council members, including the proximity to the adjacent gas station, convenience store and car wash, as well as the project’s aesthetics. New concerns were shared about traffic impacts and lack of parking, due to new state law because of its location near the BART Station.
The project is one of the 10 Commercial Infill Housing (CIH) Overlay District parcels the council rezoned in 2022 that will allow extremely-low, very-low and low-income apartment complexes throughout the city. (See related articles here and here)
The 165 apartments, complete with 145 parking stalls and site improvements, are planned to be built immediately adjacent to the 76 gas station and 7-Eleven that has a 24-7 carwash on the corner of Hillcrest Avenue and E. Tregallas Road. Mayor Pro Tem and District 3 Councilman Don Freitas wanted the project to be redesigned with the apartments located on the other side of the 4.9-acre parcel. Mayor Ron Bernal was concerned about how the four-story apartment buildings would look. But due to the rezoning vote in 2022, the City Council has no say, and all of the CIH projects only require staff-level, administrative approval without any public input. The Hillcrest Summit Apartments project has already been approved by City staff.
The project is proposed to be 100% affordable with the following breakdown of affordability:
Hillcrest Summit Apartments AMI figures. Source: City of Antioch
No City Financial Obligation
During the brief staff presentation for the agenda item, #4, Planning Manager Zoe Merideth explained, “The City will not have financial or legal obligation regarding the repayment of the debt.” But the Tax Equity Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (“TEFRA”) and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 require the Council to hold a public hearing and vote to approve the financing for the project to receive the funds.
“This is a private loan with the borrower and the bank,” Meredith added. “Again, such adoption is solely for the purposes of satisfying TEFRA, Internal Revenue Code and California Government Code.”
According to the City staff report, the tax-exempt revenue bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $50,000,000 to be issued by the California Municipal Finance Authority (CMFA) will be used to finance or refinance the acquisition, construction, improvement and equipping of the project and pay certain expenses incurred in connection with the issuance of the bonds.
Hillcrest Summit Apartments site and location maps. Source: City of Antioch
Public Comments & Proponents’ Responses
A representative of the developer, Los Angeles-based Cypress Equity Investments, LLC, Garrett Borges, Vice President of Real Estate Development, and Jarod Suzuki, Financial Advisor for the CMFA, the bond issuer, said they were available to answer any questions.
During public comments, with three residents in favor and one against the project, Suzuki responded reiterating, “The City is not party on the transaction. As a part of our policy, we share 25 percent of our fees with the host city. It’s just a CMFA policy. We just give away some of our fees.”
According to the CMFA website, “The CMFA shares 25% of all issuance fees directly with its member communities. In addition, a grant equal to 25% of the issuance fee is made to the California Foundation for Stronger Communities (‘CFSC’) to fund charities designated by the member communities.”
Borges further explained, “These projects pay all of our impact fees as part of the development for the project…to help with the schools.”
“We hope that us developing this and providing these affordable units for the community is where the police officers and the teachers and those types of folks within the community that need a little help on their housing can come and be a part of the community,” he added. “So, hopefully a benefit to the community rather than a perceived blight.”
Hillcrest Summit Apartments Elevations – views of the north and east sides from E. Tregallas Road and Hillcrest Avenue. Source: City of Antioch
Council Questions, Concerns About Traffic Impacts, Lack of Parking Allowed by State Law
Freitas was first to speak saying, “It’s never been, for me, about providing affordable housing or providing this type of housing. But how did we get to this point? The public needs to understand what this project may or may not have.”
Planning Manager Meredith explained the project is one of the CIH sites and it “was administratively approved in the fall of 2025.”
“So, this property is zoned commercial?” the councilman asked.
“It could be either,” Meredith said. The underlying zoning is still commercial, but the CIH Overlay District allows for multi-family housing, she explained.
Freitas then asked about the “money coming back to the City of Antioch” and “the amount that will be.”
Bond-issuer representative Suzuki said, “Right now it’s roughly $15,000.”
Freitas then asked, “Can the City require police services on this parcel?”
Meredith responded, “The developer does pay impact fees and the City has a Community Facilities District for police.”
“Roughly, how much are we talking about? Would it pay for one officer,” Freitas asked.
Assistant City Attorney Kevin Kundinger responded, “I believe the CFD is about $300 per unit paid on a yearly basis.” That would amount to $49,500 per year total.
Freitas then mentioned his concerns that he shared with the developer “six or eight months ago” including the driveway access off Hillcrest Avenue.
“When I looked at this project, the first thing for me was safety,” he stated. “The traffic congestion is a Level F and just like high school, F means failure.”
Meredith pointed out there are two entrances and exits, with the other one on Shaddick Drive off E. Tregallas Road.
Freitas then asked, “Are there 165 parking spaces?”
“This project has 145 parking stalls,” Meredith shared.
“If one or two people have a car, there are not enough parking spaces, here to actually facilitate the people who live here and park there,” Freitas stated, then asked, “So, where are they going to go? They can’t park on Hillcrest. They cannot park on East Tregallas. The only place that they can park is Shaddick. So, what’s going to happen is the overflow cars are going to go into the neighborhoods. We will have residents coming down, screaming at us, ‘what’s wrong with you idiots, why did you ever approve this project? It has ruined our quality of life.’”
He also mentioned St. John’s Lutheran Church, which is across Shaddick Drive from the project saying, “They’re not going to be happy because their parishioners are going to have a difficult time finding parking.”
However, because the complex is located within a mile of a transit station, specifically the BART Station, state law allows for new multi-family housing developments to not include any parking.
Freitas then repeated his concern about the proximity of the project to the neighboring gas station, 7-11 and carwash saying, “The property line is a couple of feet from the commercial area. So, there will be fumes…noise, twenty-four-seven. You think the people living there are going to come to the council and scream at us? Yeah, they will.’ He then mentioned children living there and his concerns about walking into traffic or to the gas station.
“When I met with the representative, I shared these and a lot more issues,” the councilman continued. “Instead of building the project next to the property line, flip it over and there is room. ‘No, no. We don’t want to do that. That would be too expensive.’”
Freitas said he asked the developer about not providing enough parking. “Well, that’s what’s required. That’s what we’re going to do.”
“The area in blue, that is for the children,” he stated. “That little area, right next to cars that are going to be parking in that particular area. As a parent, that would scare me.”
“So, I made lots of recommendations and the expectation that as a good builder, that they would consider some of those suggestions, and they never, ever called me back,” Freitas stated.
“Now, how did we get here? It is state law,” he explained. “And we did create this and it was approved in 2022 (by the previous council) and we are stuck with it.”
“So…in April when the council basically said, ‘no’ to this…we get a letter from the Department of Housing and Community Development from the State of California,” Freitas stated. “Basically, because we’re now dealing with the mandates from the State of California to the local jurisdiction, that you all need to build a lot more affordable housing and if you do not approve this then, guess what? You will be out of compliance in your approved housing element.”
“What impact would that be to the City of Antioch if we did not have an approved housing element?” he asked Planning Manager Meredith.
“You would be subject to the builder’s remedy, for example, which would allow housing to be built anywhere in the city,” she explained. “You could be subject to fines and also increased scrutiny by HCD, for example.”
“I want to make sure you heard that,” Freitas then said to those sitting in the gallery. “A developer could come into the city and build whatever she or he wanted and none of us, here could raise an objection. What kind of projects do you think we’re going to get?”
Freitas then shared concerns about the height of the four-story project saying, “So, here we are at one of the most important entrances to the City of Antioch. You’re going to have a gas station and right behind that… you’re going to have a four-story…structure. It is so ugly. I do not want that monolith, there…and the color scheme is usually brown or a deep, deep grey. It is ugly, it is ugly, it is ugly. It is not something that I would embrace.”
“It’s not just coming before us and asking us to approve this funding,” he continued. “This project should never have been allowed. But it is and the State of California has basically said to us…we don’t care what you like or dislike. If you don’t do it, that shotgun we have at your head, we’ll pull the trigger.”
“So, tonight, frankly, we have no choice,” Freitas stated. “Because the alternative is even worse than this and that’s the tragedy from my perspective. Frankly, there’s ten of these projects, people…and I think it’s disgusting and I think it’s wrong.” (Actually, only five have been so far approved by staff. The council could rezone the other five CIH Overlay District parcels).
“Who am I holding responsible?” the councilman asked. “The State of California.”
District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker, who voted for the overlay districts, spoke next asking, “So, are we voting to avoid a lawsuit? Do we need a motion or what are we doing?”
Freitas responded, “We have no choice.”
District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson, who also voted for the overlay districts, spoke next saying, “I agree whole-heartedly with…Mayor Pro Tem Freitas.” She then asked Acting City Manager Ana Cortez, “Is this even going to fulfill any of our RHNA requirements?”
She was referring to the Regional Housing Needs Allocation which, as previously reported, requires the City of Antioch to approve 3,016 more housing units between 2023 and 2031. They include 792 Very Low Income units (less than 50% of Area Median Income), 456 Low Income (50-80% AMI), 493 Moderate Income (80-120% AMI) and 1,275 Above Moderate Income (greater than 120% AMI) units based on the Area Median Income in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Meredith responded, “Yes. These count towards RHNA.”
Then repeating a question asked during public comments, Wilson asked staff, “Is it going to benefit…Antioch workforce residents…who are struggling, or first come, first served?”
Developer’s representative Borges responded, “We try to give priority where we can to Antioch residents. We’re obviously bound by fair housing laws. Those are very strict as far as how we are allowed to give preference.”
“We were happy and excited to fulfill what we thought was the council wishes to bring affordable housing to this site,” he continued, in response to the concerns raised by Freitas. He also said the City did a traffic study “and one of the ways we mitigate the impacts is paying a traffic impact fee which goes to the City to improve these intersections.” Regarding parking Borges said, “Because of our proximity to BART the State states, actually that we don’t have to have any parking as part of the project. We, as good developers, who will own and operate this, don’t think that that’s prudent or wise. So, we’ve fit as much parking as we could on the site.”
District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha then said, “To clarify, this item is not to approve or deny the project. This is a TEFRA hearing. Should we vote this down…they can also go to the County, I believe, or to the State and get the bonds elsewhere and we would be subject to the consequences you alluded to, earlier,” directing his comments to Freitas.
“So, I’m not crazy about the project for the reasons you stated,” he continued. “But we are here to talk about the bonds being issued, yes or no. Not about whether we are accepting or denying the project. I am in favor of affordable housing because it’s necessary in the community.”
Rocha then made the motion to approve the bonds.
But before a second was entertained, Mayor Ron Bernal asked if “the applicant had addressed the issues” raised at the council meeting in April
“I believe the applicant is willing to work with us on the aesthetics, including the siding, to make it a neutral green, rather than the grey,” Meredith responded. “I have some driveway improvements on Hillcrest, as well.”
Freitas then seconded the motion saying, “I’m going to second because we have to,” and it passed 5-0.
Speeding continues to endanger lives on California roadways, making it a priority for the California Highway Patrol in its efforts to make roads safer.
By Jaime Coffee, CHP Director of Communications Office of Media Relations
SACRAMENTO— The California Highway Patrol (CHP) is reminding motorists to slow down and drive responsibly as they head out for Independence Day celebrations statewide. To address unsafe driving and keep California’s roads safe, the CHP will conduct a Holiday Enforcement Period (HEP) from July 2 at 6 p.m. to July 5 at 11:59 p.m., with an emphasis on combating speeding.
During last year’s 78-hour Independence Day HEP, CHP officers responded to more than 850 speed-related crashes. Tragically, at least seven of those collisions resulted in the loss of life, and nearly 400 crashes resulted in injuries to those involved. In addition, CHP officers made 1,311 arrests for driving under the influence – an average of one DUI arrest every three and a half minutes.
“Reckless driving and speeding continue to endanger lives on California’s roadways,” said CHP Commissioner Sean Duryee. “As families and friends travel this holiday weekend, we urge everyone to slow down, be considerate of others and make responsible choices behind the wheel. Getting there safely is what matters most.”
Higher Speeds, Greater Consequences
Speeding is dangerous – it slows reaction time, increases stopping distance and crash severity, and can lead to serious, even fatal, consequences. According to the CHP’s Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System, an average of more than 115,000 collisions in California each year are attributed to speed. The data also shows that speeding contributes to about 600 traffic-related deaths statewide each year.
During this Independence Day HEP, the CHP will continue using 100 low-profile, specially marked patrol vehicles to target dangerous driving behaviors on California’s highways. These vehicles blend into traffic, allowing officers to identify reckless drivers before taking enforcement action. Since their deployment last year, CHP officers operating these vehicles have issued over 59,000 speed-related citations statewide.
Pilot Program Targets Speeds
In December 2025, the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and the CHP launched a pilot program to swiftly take action against drivers caught traveling more than 100 mph, aiming to reduce potentially deadly crashes. The FAST (Forwarded Actions for Speeding Tickets) program automatically refers drivers to the DMV for review – independent of any court proceedings – to determine whether immediate action, such as license suspension or revocation, is warranted.
According to the DMV, the CHP submitted more than 3,200 FAST referrals between January and May 2026 for drivers engaging in speeding and high-risk driving behavior. The DMV responded with more than 3,000 suspension and re-examination actions, 94.3% of which were upheld after administrative review and hearings, demonstrating the program’s effectiveness in identifying drivers who pose a significant risk to public safety.
Simple Steps to Help Save Lives
To help prevent crashes and save lives this Independence Day weekend, the CHP encourages everyone to take the following safety precautions:
Plan ahead and designate a sober driver before celebrations begin.
Use a rideshare service, taxi or public transportation if you have been drinking.
Host responsibly and ensure guests have a safe way home.
Never drive under the influence of alcohol, cannabis or other impairing substances.
Always wear your seat belt; it remains one of the most effective ways to reduce injuries and save lives in a crash.
If someone is about to drive impaired, speak up, take the keys, and help them get home safely.
Help remove a dangerous driver from the road by dialing 9-1-1.
The mission of the CHP is to provide the highest level of Safety, Service and Security.
The brass plate marks the Mount Diablo Initial Point inside the Visitor’s Center. Left source: Mount Diablo State Park. Right photo: The Center for Land Use Interpretation (CLUI)
Free historic public event commemorates one of the most significant survey monuments in the American West
By Mount Diablo State Park & Public Land Survey System Foundation
Join us on July 18, 2026, for a day-long public celebration commemorating the history and enduring importance of one of the West’s most significant surveying landmarks and an important day in California mapping history.
On a hot summer day in 1851 Colonel Leander Ransom and his survey crew carried their equipment to the top of Mount Diablo and established the Mount Diablo Initial Point – the starting point for mapping property lines for much of California and all of Nevada.
Celebrate the 175th anniversary of the Initial Point with us…explore antique and modern surveying equipment, visit information booths, enjoy hands-on exhibits showcasing the science and practice of land surveying and activities designed to introduce younger visitors to the profession. Land surveyors and historians will be on hand to demonstrate equipment and answer questions about the history and significance of the Initial Point and Mount Diablo’s prominence. Guided tours will point out the original survey monuments housed inside the Summit Visitor Center.
The free educational event will be held from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. at the Summit Upper Lot in Mount Diablo State Park. Visitors of all ages are invited to experience interactive exhibits, historical surveying demonstrations, educational presentations, and family-friendly activities that illustrate the vital role surveying has played in the development of California and Nevada.
According to The Center for Land Use Interpretation, the Mount Diablo Initial Point “is one of 37 federal survey points of origin covering the USA (outside of the 13 original colonies), known as Initial Points, selected over the course of 150 years, to anchor newly acquired federal land to the legal and cartographic grid.
“Most Initial Points are created incidentally, as baselines (and sometimes the meridians) are usually created first, with one end anchored on relatively immutable geographic features, such as the confluence of rivers, or latitudinal lines. The west has a number of exceptions, where prominent peaks were selected to be Initial Points, and then base-lines and meridians were drawn from them, as their visibility from great distances aided the surveyor’s task. Such was the case with Mount Diablo, an isolated mound rising above the surrounding valley, east of the San Francisco Bay area.”
A concrete column, built at the same time as the rest of the structure, sits atop the exposed bedrock of the summit and continues through the ceiling to a viewing gallery on the level above where it is topped with a brass plate. Photos: CLUI
“Mount Diablo has the most elaborate commemorative architectures of all the Initial Points. The building at the top of the mountain, built by the Civilian Conservation Corps in the 1930s, contains a small museum and encloses a monument built on top of the summit. The building itself extends the peak another 45 feet in elevation. A concrete column, built at the same time as the rest of the structure, sits atop the exposed bedrock of the summit and continues through the ceiling to a viewing gallery on the level above where it is topped with a brass plate. The rock of the actual summit is exposed at the base of the concrete column. An opening at the base of the column was provided to allow access to the exact spot from which the survey was conducted, marked now by a copper bolt head left from a 1876 triangulation station.”
The survey lines from Mount Diablo extend from the Pacific Ocean to Utah, and from Monterey Bay to Oregon, covering an area that includes most of California and all of Nevada (in green) and U.S. Meridians and Baselines map. Sources: (left) CLUI and (right) U.S. Dep’t of the Interior Bureau of Land Management
According to the Mount Diablo Surveyors Historical Society, “California has three initial points; Mount Diablo Base and Meridian (est. 1851) (center), San Bernardino Base and Meridian (est. 1852) (bottom), and Humboldt Base and Meridian (est. 1853) (top). Initial points are the starting points, and were established to describe and enable the government to sell public lands covering California and Nevada which were part of the Public Lands Survey System (PLSS).”
Visitors are encouraged to bring lunch, snacks, drinks and sunscreen and plan to spend the day enjoying the mountaintop setting while learning about one of California’s most enduring historical landmarks.
The former Comfort Inn, now Antioch Inn & Suites, is being considered for the Homekey+ program to house the homeless at a cost of up to $1.2 million per year. Photo courtesy of Mike Barbanica
Before deciding to accept or reject State Homekey+funding
City staff answer councilmembers’ questions; can only use 15% of CDBG funds to cover the up to $1.2 million annual commitment
By Allen D. Payton
As agreed to during their meeting this past Tuesday, June 23, 2026, the Antioch City Council will hold a study session Monday, June 29th, to discuss and get questions answered regarding the State Homekey+ funding for the Mahogany Housing Project at the Antioch Inn & Suites, formerly Comfort Inn. It will help the council members determine whether they will vote to accept or reject the $34.9 million grant at their next regular meeting on July 28th.
The City would have to commit an initial $750,000 already included in next year’s budget, plus, up to an additional $1.2 million per year for the next five for $6.75 million total and as many as 15 years for a total City commitment of $18.75 million. The State and City funds will provide for the acquisition and rehabilitation of the hotel on Mahogany Way, for approximately 84 units of permanent supportive housing.
On average, the state and city funds combined would total $41.75 million or about $500,000 per unit over the first five years and approximately $54.4 million or $640,000 per unit over the full 15-year period.
However, Mayor Pro Tem and District 3 Councilman Don Freitas asked if the other 40 rooms would still be rented for public hotel accommodations. Another question asked by District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha, that City staff did not have an answer for, was what would happen if a future council chooses to not continue the program. Those are just two of the questions the council members want answered before they vote.
As previously reported, following Council direction at their meeting on May 22, 2025, the City applied for the Homekey+ funding. “The project application assumes ongoing operating assistance averaging approximately $1.2 million annually during the initial five-year period,” for a total of an additional $6 million. “If such funding levels were maintained over the full fifteen-year period, the total potential City contribution could be approximately $18.75 million, from the General Fund.”
“The City would receive the benefit of approximately $34.9 million in State Homekey+ funding,” awarded in May, 2026, “for acquisition and rehabilitation of the project. The City would assume ongoing administrative, monitoring, and compliance responsibilities associated with participation in the program.”
“While the City was a co-applicant and recipient of the award, the City has not executed the Homekey+ Standard Agreement with HCD and has not formally accepted the grant funds. Because the…Agreement has not been executed, the City currently has no contractual obligation to participate in the project. The City would not assume the reporting, compliance, monitoring, or administrative responsibilities associated with the Homekey+ Program.” However, if the Council declines the grant funds, “the City could experience reduced competitiveness for certain future discretionary housing funding opportunities.”
Staff Answers questions
In the City staff report for the item, SM-1 on the agenda, they answered a variety of the council members’ questions.
HOMEKEY+ AWARD STATUS
The project received a conditional award in March 2026. The Acceptance of Terms was signed by both the City and CSH on March 17, 2026.
The award letter indicates that the representations made in the application are the basis for the award. HCD has been preparing the Standard Agreement, which is the final contract document for the award. The Standard Agreement has not been presented to the City as of the writing of this staff report.
HCD TIMELINES & PROJECT MILESTONES
“One of the primary questions raised by Council was related to timelines required by HCD. To staff’s knowledge, there does not appear to be an immediate concrete deadline.
“However, HCD described a series of project milestones tied to the award letter, Standard Agreement, construction, rehabilitation, and lease-up schedule. The longer the City delays execution and project advancement, the more difficult it becomes for the project to meet the milestones contemplated in the award and the Homekey+ Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA). Homekey+ is designed to support the relatively rapid development of permanent supportive housing, and HCD expressed concern regarding the amount of time that has passed since issuance of the March 2026 conditional award.
In simple terms, staff understands the timeline issue as follows:
The City has received a conditional award.
The acceptance of award terms was signed.
HCD is preparing or has prepared the Standard Agreement.
Project milestones are tied to execution and project delivery.
Delay does not automatically terminate the award today, but continued delay increases risk to the award and project schedule.
PROJECT CONFIGURATION & UNIT COUNT
“The existing Comfort Inn currently contains 123 hotel rooms. Under the proposed Homekey+ project, the property would be rehabilitated and reconfigured into a total of 85 residential units, consisting of 84 permanent supportive housing units and one on-site manager’s unit. The reduction in the total number of units does not represent unused space or hotel rooms that would continue operating for transient lodging. Rather, the rehabilitation combines multiple existing hotel rooms to create larger, code-compliant residential units while also incorporating the infrastructure necessary for permanent supportive housing, including kitchenettes, accessibility improvements, property management offices, supportive service and case management offices, community gathering space, laundry facilities, recreation areas and other resident amenities.”
PROPERTY STATUS & REPORTED LOAN DEFAULT
The staff report also shares, “Council and members of the public raised concerns regarding news reports that the
property is associated with a loan default. Since the June 23, 2026, City Council meeting, staff has received additional information directly from the lending institution regarding the status of the loan.
“According to the lender, while a Notice of Default has been filed against the property, there is currently no foreclosure or trustee sale scheduled. The lender advised that it is actively working with the property owner to facilitate the sale of the hotel for the Homekey+ project and is aware that the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has awarded funding for the project. The lender further indicated that it will work cooperatively with the borrower, project partners, and the City to facilitate the transaction and is aligned with HCD’s project timeline.”
POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES FOR ONGOING HOMELESS SERVICES:
The staff report also offers some other funding sources for homeless services. However, one source can’t be used, and the City can only use 15 percent of its annual Community Development Block Grant funds, which was suggested by District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker.
“During Council discussion, questions were raised regarding whether existing City, State, or Federal funding sources could be used to offset the potential ongoing operating commitment associated with the Homekey+ project. Staff evaluated several potential funding sources and summarized the findings below.
“Staff evaluated several existing funding sources to determine whether they could realistically offset the City’s projected operating commitment. While each funding source could potentially contribute to project operations, each carries statutory limitations or would require significant reductions to existing programs currently serving Antioch residents. Accordingly, none of the identified funding sources currently provides a complete replacement for the projected operating subsidy without corresponding impacts to existing City priorities.”
Housing Successor Funds
“The City currently allocates approximately $500,000 annually in Housing Successor funds toward homeless services, subject to available fund balance…these funds are expected to remain available for approximately two to three additional years.
“Redirecting the entire annual homeless services allocation to support Homekey+ operations would require discontinuing or significantly reducing programs currently serving approximately 2,688 homeless and at-risk Antioch residents through eight community-based organizations. It would also eliminate or significantly reduce funding for tenant-landlord mediation, eviction prevention, emergency rental assistance, legal services for tenants facing eviction, and a City staff position currently dedicated to housing services.”
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
“Federal regulations limit CDBG public service expenditures to 15 percent of the City’s annual allocation. Based on recent grant awards, this equates to approximately $127,500 annually, although the amount varies each year.
“Using the City’s entire public service allocation for Homekey+ operations would eliminate funding for the City’s competitive public service grant program during that funding cycle, affecting approximately 13 nonprofit organizations currently serving at least 1,655 Antioch residents, including programs supporting seniors, individuals with disabilities, youth, victims of abuse and other vulnerable populations. Additionally, such a change would require a Substantial Amendment to the City’s HUD Consolidated Plan, completion of a federal public participation process, and would not be available until the next funding cycle.
Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA)
“The City receives approximately $350,000 annually through the State’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) Program. State requirements dedicate a significant portion of these funds to housing rehabilitation, first-time homebuyer assistance, accessory dwelling units, and administration. Approximately 55 percent of the annual allocation (roughly $190,000 annually) could potentially be directed toward homelessness-related activities through the City’s next five-year PLHA planning process.
“However, redirecting these funds would require reducing or eliminating other housing priorities currently supported through PLHA, including affordable homeownership assistance and housing rehabilitation programs. Any change would require HCD approval and completion of the City’s next required five-year planning process.
“Staff also evaluated whether the HUD Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program could be used to finance ongoing Homekey+ operations. Section 108 is intended to finance capital improvements, including housing acquisition and rehabilitation, public facilities, infrastructure improvements, and economic development projects. It is not an eligible funding source for ongoing supportive services, staffing, case management, or annual operating expenses. As a result, Section 108 could potentially support future capital improvements but cannot be used to fund the City’s proposed operating commitment associated with the Homekey+ project.”
QUESTIONS RAISED BY COUNCIL AND STAFF RESPONSE SUMMARY
1. Is the award final or conditional? Not yet. HCD has issued a conditional award of $34.9 million and the project has advanced beyond the application stage. However, the project is not yet fully finalized because the Standard Agreement has not been fully executed and other program requirements must still be satisfied before grant funds may be disbursed.
2. Has the City already accepted the award? The City previously executed and returned the Conditional Award Acceptance acknowledging the terms and conditions of the award. HCD has confirmed that this document does not, by itself, obligate the City to execute the Standard Agreement or proceed with the project. Execution of the Standard Agreement remains the action that commits the parties to the grant.
3. Does the City have to pay $1.2 million immediately?
No. The operating subsidy is tied to project operations and is not expected to begin until the project is operational, currently anticipated in 2027.
4. What happens if the City declines? If the City elects not to execute the Standard Agreement, HCD would likely rescind the Homekey+ award and the current project would not proceed under this funding allocation. HCD has advised that declining an award could be considered during evaluation of future competitive funding applications; however, any effect on future scoring would depend on the specific funding program and evaluation criteria in place at that time.
5. How does the current loan default affect the project? Based upon discussions between the City’s legal counsel, project representatives, and parties associated with the existing financing, the reported loan default appears to involve the current property owner rather than the Homekey+ project itself. While it may affect the timing or structure of the acquisition, HCD has advised that acquisition through foreclosure, receivership, negotiated purchase, or other lawful means may still be possible. The developer continues to evaluate acquisition options with the lender and trustee.
6. Is this a loan? No. HCD described Homekey+ as a grant program. The City’s obligation is related to its role as co-applicant, payee, and proposed local contributor.
7. Who receives and administers funds? HCD indicated the City is required to be the payee. Specific disbursement controls may be established through escrow or other approved structures.
8. Who gets housed? Residents would be referred to through approved eligibility and referral systems, not through open walk-in access. The final tenant selection and referral process must comply with Homekey+, fair housing, and coordinated entry requirements.
9. Can Antioch residents be prioritized? This requires additional legal and programmatic clarification. County partners have indicated that some projects have used lawful local targeting approaches, but final structure must comply with fair housing and funding requirements.
10. What public safety measures will be in place? The final operations plan should include property management, staffing, service coordination, resident expectations, security protocols, and coordination with APD and County partners.
A Closed Session beginning at 6:00 p.m. will be held to again negotiate contracts with City employee groups who have been working without one since last fall including the Management Unit, Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3, Confidential Unit, Antioch Police Officers Association and Antioch Police Sworn Management Association. The study session will begin at 6:30 p.m. inside the Council Chambers at City Hall, 200 H Street in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown. It can be viewed livestream on the City’s website or the City’s YouTube channel.
Longest continuous, non-motorized coast-to-coast relay in world history begins July 1st in California
By Dave Whitson, Director, 250 Relay, American Discovery Trail Society
Starting next Wednesday, July 1st, the American Discovery Trail Society (ADTS) celebrates the outdoors and 250 years of our independence with the American Discovery250 Relay— a 6,800-mile (11,000 km) journey along the entire American Discovery Trail from California to Delaware. This event will be the longest continuous, non-motorized relay in world history. Participants will carry specialized batons carrying a replica of the Declaration of Independence. (See related article)
Source: American Discovery Trail
The FIRST WEEK highlights are as follows:
Wednesday, July 1st: Relay begins at Point Reyes National Seashore at Limantour Beach. Members of the 1980-81 HikaNation event will be on hand to help start the relay. This event inspired the establishment of the American Discovery Trail, and details can be found in the attachment, below. The relay will start at 8:30 AM PT.
Saturday, July 4th: The Relay crosses the Golden Gate Bridge. A July 4th party hosted by Pier 39 takes place from 11AM to NOON.
Monday, July 6th UC Berkeley, CA to Heather Farms Walnut Creek, CA. Start time: 8AM
Tuesday, July 7th: Heather Farms Walnut Creek, CA to Antioch Community Park, CA. Start time: 8:30AM
Tuesday, July 7th: City of Clayton Welcome. Noon to 1PM. Contact Chris Karney, chrisk@claytonca.gov or 925-943-2680.
Wednesday, July 8th: Antioch Community Park, CA to Sacramento – William Land Park, CA. Start time: 7:30AM
Wednesday, July 8th: City of Oakley Welcome. Time TBA. Contact Troy Faulk, Faulk@ci.oakley.ca.us or 925-625-7038.
Wednesday, July 8th: Yolo County Welcome. Noon to 1PM. Contact Terry Selk, terry@visityolo.com or 530-297-1900
Interested participants or teams are asked to register for FREE at discoverytrail.org/america-250-relay. Runners, cyclists, hikers, wheelchair users and horseback riders are all encouraged to take part. We also encourage interest from those who wish to help with logistics, welcoming events or sponsorships.
About the American Discovery Trail
The American Discovery Trail is the nation’s first non-motorized coast-to-coast trail. It runs for 6,800 miles through 15 states and Washington, D.C. The route incorporates numerous local, state, and national trails, with most of them designed for walking, hiking, and running and for bicycle and equestrian use. It connects scores of scenic and historic trails, backcountry roads, national parks and forests plus thousands of state and local properties of historic, cultural and natural significance. Users can experience their local environment, or the 23 ecosystems the trail passes through – deserts, mountains, forests, waterfronts, and plains. You can learn more about the ADT by visiting www.discoverytrail.org.
Velma Wilson to sing National Anthem before July 3rd game
By Allen D. Payton
Tickets are available to the California Classic NBA Tournament on July 3rd to support the 4 Ever Me Foundation’s 14th Annual Stuff the Bus School Supply Giveaway. The public is encouraged to purchase tickets for themselves or for foster and group homes to take their youth.
“This is such an awesome opportunity to bring children out to see the games,” said Founder Claryssa Wilson.
Friday’s games include the Miami Heat vs. the San Antonio Spurs at 5 p.m. and the Warriors vs. Lakers at 7:30 p.m.
$5 from each ticket, starting at $35 and up, will support the Giveaway scheduled for Saturday, August 1st.
California Classic games will include rookies selected in the 2026 NBA Draft along with players competing to make the NBA and G League regular season rosters.
The former Comfort Inn now Antioch Inn & Suites is being considered for the HomeKey+ program to house the homeless at a cost of up to $1.2 million per year. Photo courtesy of Mike Barbanica
Study Session on Monday, June 29th
Program would spend about $500K to $640K per permanent supportive housing unit
“That hotel is not going to operate as a hotel. It’s going to have a fence around it. People are going to start breaking in and…living there whether you want them to or not.” To her fellow council members: “I have no problem renting vans and dropping people off in front of your homes if we don’t get a solution.”- District 1 Councilwoman Torres-Walker
“I cannot sit here and support committing money we do not have.” – Mayor Ron Bernal
By Allen D. Payton
During their meeting on Tuesday night, June 23, 2026, which lasted past midnight, after receiving public comments on both sides of the issue, the Antioch City Council postponed a decision on accepting state funding for the Homekey+ California Supportive Housing (CSH) Mahogany Housing Project. The City would have to commit an initial $750,000 already included in next year’s budget, plus, an additional $1.2 million per year for the next five years. The funds will provide for the acquisition and rehabilitation of the Antioch Inn & Suites, formerly known as the Comfort Inn on Mahogany Way, for approximately 84 to 85 units of permanent supportive housing.
On average, the state and city funds combined would total $41.75 million or about $500,000 per unit over the first five years and approximately $54.4 million or $640,000 per unit over the full 15-year period.
According to the City staff report for Item 9 on this past Tuesday’s agenda, “consistent with the approved Homekey+ application and prior City Council authorization, the City identified a proposed $750,000 contribution to support acquisition and rehabilitation costs associated with the project. The proposed contribution is reflected in the City’s Five-Year Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan. Funding for this contribution is included in the proposed FY 2026/27 Housing Successor budget.
Following Council direction at their meeting on May 22, 2025, the City applied for the Homekey+ funding. “The project application assumes ongoing operating assistance averaging approximately $1.2 million annually during the initial five-year period,” for a total of an additional $6 million. “If such funding levels were maintained over the full fifteen-year period, the total potential City contribution could be approximately $18.75 million, from the General Fund.”
“The City would receive the benefit of approximately $34.9 million in State Homekey+ funding,” awarded in May, 2026, “for acquisition and rehabilitation of the project. The City would assume ongoing administrative, monitoring, and compliance responsibilities associated with participation in the program.”
“While the City was a co-applicant and recipient of the award, the City has not executed the Homekey+ Standard Agreement with HCD and has not formally accepted the grant funds. Because the…Agreement has not been executed, the City currently has no contractual obligation to participate in the project. The City would not assume the reporting, compliance, monitoring, or administrative responsibilities associated with the Homekey+ Program.” However, if the Council declines the grant funds, “the City could experience reduced competitiveness for certain future discretionary housing funding opportunities.”
Public Comments
During Public Comments several residents spoke in favor and against the project.
Lynette Clark, who said she’s a 34-year Antioch resident, spoke against the project, specifically its location, regarding “the potential long-term impacts project Homekey could have on Antioch neighborhoods, quality of life and community resources.” She said it “represents a 50-year commitment” and “1.2 million per year. Those funds could be used for youth programs, community services and, yes, economic development.” Clark asked for transparency regarding the results of the “successes and failures of Project Homekey sites throughout California.”
“The proposed location could negatively impact Antioch’s efforts to attract businesses, employers, hotels and redevelopment,” she continued. “It creates a first impression. Economic development depends heavily on public perception, safety, neighborhood appearance and investor confidence.”
“Is this the best location if Antioch’s stated goal is attracting investment, redevelopment and economic growth?” Clark asked.
She mentioned “drug activity, theft, disturbances, increased law enforcement calls” at other HomeKey projects. the facility and her concerns that the Antioch project “will house individuals with significant behavioral health, substance abuse and mental health needs.”
Crystal Law said, “We already spend over $1 million just cleaning up these…encampments and yet, want to argue all this extra stuff. However, when we have people out there, dying in the streets, there’s no question, yes, we absolutely need this site. Yes, we need to do this…for people in the city and the residents of Antioch. But yet, you want to take that $1.2 million…and you want to give it to City employees and incentives. Come on, now. It will help to clean up, down here, it will help to get businesses going…get people off the street…help to get people healthy, again. They’ll have case workers…mental health workers. They’ll have the ability to actually move forward. This is permanent housing, not transitional housing, so, it’s not like they will be in and out and going all over the place.”
A man named Jay who owns the 7-11 store across Auto Center Drive from the hotel said he “invested in here about three years ago. I did everything in my mighty power to clean this place up. It’s turned over a lot, now. But I am, actually, just a little scared of the traffic it’s going to be bringing in. I’m doing everything there in my mighty power every day to stop the theft…get people off that property.” He said, “they give us a hard time” and mentioned “struggling with the turnover. Employees don’t want to work there due to those issues.”
Antioch Police Oversight Commission Vice Chair Devin Williams urged the council to support the project saying, “If we get the…$34 million we can find the solutions. It’s not a complete fix but it’s a start. To turn it away would only put us back more.” He then challenged the mayor and two council members saying, “Ya’ll ran on it in 2024” in last year’s elections. “Ron, you ran on economic development and improvement.
Joe Mitchell said he “is not in support of the project due to the City’s current financial situation” and “the 1.2 million…there’s no guarantee that will cover the support for that facility. You guys had to cut, basically do magic, last year to get the budget down to where it was. Still, we’re facing a $12 million deficit.”
“So, monies that are needed to help the City function, can’t spare anything, right now,” he continued. “Sales tax isn’t going up. Our revenue is not going to go up and we can’t overcommit. I really support efforts to help unhoused folks. But our city can’t afford it. We need a full funded police department. We’re approaching a perfect storm for disaster. So, I think it would be a mistake to make that long-term commitment.”
Both council candidate and former Antioch Police Crime Prevention Commission Chair Sandra White and former Mayor Pro Tem and current Antioch Police Oversight Commissioner Manny Soliz, Jr. spoke against the project. She said, “I am here, tonight to respectfully oppose the proposed HomeKey project because of the financial and public safety challenges our city’s already facing. Antioch is already struggling to provide the level of public safety and city services that residents need.”
She said she’s concerned that, “Antioch taxpayers would pay these costs even though the project will serve unhoused individuals throughout Contra Costa County” and the challenges of the project’s residents “can increase demand on law enforcement…and other City resources.”
“The issue isn’t whether we should we help vulnerable people. The question is whether Antioch…is in the position to take on this additional responsibility, right now,” White concluded.
Soliz said, “I’m speaking on my own behalf as a citizen and long-term resident. I don’t think that the City can afford this program even though I am absolutely an advocate in trying to find a solution and I do have one.”
He suggested spending the money on “the Angelo Quinto program” referring to the City’s Crisis Response Team that’s facing potential budget cuts. Soliz was also concerned the facility wouldn’t just house individuals from Antioch as “they would be coming from anywhere in the county who can qualify to live there. If we’re going to support this as taxpayers let it be for people who are Antioch residents.”
He concluded by saying, “local businesses in the area are up in arms about this project” and “I’ve also heard that there’s a possibility the owner of the property may be having some financial difficulties. You need to look into that.”
A man named Ahmad spoke next saying, “This is a difficult decision for the community. These are the things we actually want to fund that are going to better the people that are living in the city, that are coming to live in the city. I believe people will get out of the situation that they’re in then, begin to sort of pay it forward.” “I know there’s going to be a lot of work…I’m willing to help,” he concluded.
Additional residents, including local homeless advocates Nichole Gardner and Andrew Becker, who gave impassioned speeches, spoke in favor of the project. He concluded by saying, “Those 84 individuals represent 33 percent of your unhoused community.” Becker also offered to answer any questions from the council members saying he had been involved with and working on the project “for six years” and pointed out its developer wasn’t invited to attend the meeting nor was informed of it by City staff.
Council Discussion & Decision to Postpone
However, after hearing from residents the council members chose to postpone the item until their July 28th meeting.
During their discussion, District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha-Torres Walker, who represents the part of the city the project is planned for, spoke first saying, “Whether we accept or reject HomeKey tonight, like, these political stances on poor, hurting people, it doesn’t hurt me. You’re not going to prevent me from getting a win. This is not what this is about. The biggest challenge I’m having is that we have been waiting 18 months for the mayor to come back with an ad hoc committee to talk about solutions to homelessness and it still has not come back to this council.”
“You want to show up against the solution when you don’t have none,” she continued. “There’s a claim this is not a great location. What is it going to look like for people driving into the city? I can tell you what it look like because I drove around and took pictures myself just so I could be reminded of what it looks like.”
Torres-Walker spoke of fires in empty buildings where homeless Antioch residents locate for shelter.
“No one’s being bussed in here from San Francisco. I have talked to people who said they have lived on the streets in Antioch for 30 years,” she stated. “They grew up here. They mama, here, their cousins, here, they brothers, they aunties and uncles. These are not strangers to Antioch.”
Torres-Walker then spoke of the food giveaways in Antioch to people who have nowhere to cook and it ends up on the street and residents complain about dirty streets.
She spoke of the impacts on business saying, “The business owners that’s calling me are tired of stepping over people every morning just to open up their store fronts. Having to clean feces and urine out from in front of they stores, before they can invite anybody in. They know the City isn’t going to anything about them…so, they feed them themself, they feed them themself, and they move them along so they can do business then let them come back at night because there’s no real solutions.”
“The Executive Inn, I wasn’t a big supporter initially,” Torres-Walker continued speaking of the City’s first homeless hotel. “I was also afraid it was going to create unsafe conditions in the community. But having Opportunity Village (at the hotel) on Cavallo and East 18th has actually made it better. The resources are there, the structure is there and people are getting served.”
“Schools have come here and said people are camping by the schools and we feel unsafe with all of this activity. Help us,” the councilwoman stated. “They haven’t gotten any help. Churches are asking for help as they’re helping and they haven’t gotten any help.”
She then spoke of homeless encampments being visible along the railroad tracks when people drive on L Street and then mentioned “bussing people to (Council) District 4 and District 3 and dropping them off, there so then you could see it because District 2 and District 1, we have to see it, deal with it and navigate around it and find solutions every day that aren’t even supported by this city. I’m just trying to figure it out like everyone else is,” Then speaking of the annual financial commitment Torres-Walker then said. “We have 13 months before the first payment is due for wrap-around services and it’s up to 1.2 million not even the potential of the full cost. But because you want people to fearmonger you, based on a budget rather than not having lazy politicians that don’t want to do the work to figure out how we do cover the costs while reducing the burden on the General Fund just baffles me.” Actually, the staff report reads “averaging approximately $1.2 million” but staff later clarified the amount of the City’s annual commitment.
“Because we can get creative,” she continued. “We have the CDBG (federal Community Development Block Grant fund allocations) coming up for a new five-year cycle. There’s housing and homelessness funds in there. If we can give over one million of that money to outside organizations to help with homelessness that aren’t even based in Antioch, we could give that money to this project.”
“All we’ve been hearing for 18 months is regional conversations,” Torres-Walker stated taking swipes at the mayor. “I haven’t heard one report from a regional conversation, yet where we could find out regionally how if every city is willing to kick in. But you have 13 months to do it. County conversations…you just complain about how the County doesn’t support but you never reach out to anybody in the County. You know how I know that? Because I’ve reached out to them. You know how I know the mayors of Brentwood, Pittsburg and Oakley have not been called…about regional efforts? Because I’ve talked to them.”
“You’re saying what you don’t want to see, that building is going to be blighted,” the councilwoman stated. “That hotel is not going to operate as a hotel, I’m not going to say forever, but for many years after this. It’s going to have a fence around it. People are going to start breaking in and people are going to be living there whether you want them to or not with no resources, no wrap-around services.”
“It’s not illegal to be unhoused but it should be illegal to allow people to be unhoused,” she continued. “So, this might not be the solution. But I haven’t heard one. We have people up here who got elected because they said they would address homelessness. We’ve been waiting 18 months.”
Torres-Walker then offered a suggestion from a member of the community to not reject the HomeKey+ fund but table the discussion until the next council meeting “to give those who actually want to do the work an opportunity to figure out how to relieve the burden off the General Fund.”
She then concluded her remarks by issuing a threat saying, “I’ve said this to the Council. I have no problem renting vans and dropping people off in front of your homes if we don’t get a solution.”
District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha weighed in next saying, “That’s tough to follow” and asked questions of staff of “when does the actual General Fund dollars of up to 1.2 (million) have to be kicked in to move forward” and “if this city council chooses to move forward what happens in four years when another city council chooses not to?”
Community Services Department Director Monseratt Cabral responded, “The 1.2 would happen next year. Right now, we’ll use the 750,000 (dollars) to acquire and then moving forward, 1.2. Why it’s up to 1.2 is because it’s 1.2 for the first five years, then in year six it drops down to 750 or 800,000 for the next three or four years. So, it fluctuates to the maximum of 1.2 until the year 16.”
“I’ve heard there’s a timeline for construction,” Rocha stated. “One of the things I definitely have supported this from the beginning on the application not knowing where we’d be in the budgetary process. We just overcame $54 million from our General Fund over the last two years. But looking forward, it’s like we’re faced with another $54 million or so the next three. So, if we move forward with this…something has to go along the way. I’m just talking about services and programs we may not be able to afford moving forward. It’s going to come at a cost of some General Fund dollars and services. I just want to make that clear.”
Torres-Walker responded, “A lot of the programs people have been advocating for are funded by outside funds, anyway. I think what the community is saying, the concern around sleight of hand…where we’re going to say we can’t afford this 1.2 million annually for this but then we add eight more police officers to the budget…and we’re still in discussion about COLA’s (Cost of Living Adjustments for City staff).”
“HCD (CA Department of Housing & Community Development)…nobody has even talked to the state about what’s going on. We’re just ghosting the state,” she continued then reiterated using CDBG funds to cover the $1.2 million annual cost over the next five years.
“I’m just trying to look at how we can best be stewards of our General Fund and continue to strive to meet the needs of our community,” Rocha stated.
District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson spoke passionately, as well, saying, “Thank you to those who have been in our ears for years. The housing alone isn’t enough. But services without stable housing are often not enough, either.”
She concluded by saying, “I’m in agreement if we pass on this the state will not look favorably on us in the future. The state’s going to be like, ‘You know what? Antioch is not that serious.’ I’m going to leave a comma there because I know this discussion is a never-ending one. But I’m going to leave it right there.”
The Council then voted to extend the meeting to 1:00 AM.
Mayor Ron Bernal spoke next saying, “This is obviously a very emotional subject because we’re dealing with…vulnerable people. There’s a need to fund whatever we do in this city. Stepping into a $54 million deficit with no regard to how we were going to sustain it, except we were going to ask for more money from some other agency. The feds aren’t giving it to us. The state isn’t giving it to us. The County has a failed bond measure because they can’t afford to do what they’re doing. (It was actually 0.625% sales tax on the June ballot as Measure B which failed). So, we’ve been working for the past year-and-a-half to get that $54 million two-year deficit…down to $4.5 million this year. When this came before us last May when this came before us, we had a $13 million deficit, and I was the only “no” vote on it…because we could not afford it. This was one more unfunded mandate that we were taking on that we couldn’t afford.”
“We’ve had a year to go talk to County, to talk to our neighbors and to everybody else and nothing has happened,” he stated. “So, here we are today saying we need to go out and talk to everybody and figure out how we’re going to get help on this thing. So, the bottom line is, we are facing next year…I’m just talking about money because that’s what this is, for me, right now. We can’t afford this.”
“Next year it goes back up to $14 million without cost of livings, getting our contracts up to date,” Bernal continued. “It’s probably close to $16, $17, $18 million deficit. That’s a million-and-a-half dollars a month we’re going negative in this city. We cannot afford or sustain that. So, to take on…up to $1.2 million per year for up to 15 years, that’s our maximum commitment. I cannot sit here and support committing money we do not have as we sit here. No matter how important the issues are, we can’t spend, I cannot, in good conscience, spend money that we do not have and hope that we’re going to get money down the road through grants and different things.”
“We spent…$6.8 million in (state) ERF…Encampment Resolution Funding, to house 30 to 50 individuals…moving them from the encampment…into the interim housing and into permanent housing with all the support services,” the mayor explained. “That’s happened in the last year. Our Point-In-Time Count numbers (of homeless residents) went from 240 to 250 last year. That $6.8 million investment did not result in our numbers coming down.”
“We are no closer to answering our financial problems,” he continued speaking of all the unfunded projects such as roofs and liabilities. “I just need to keep us focused on the finances of this. Our revenues are going up $300,000 in two years. That is not enough money to fund all the things we need to do in this community and to keep ourselves going with a vibrant staff that’s going to support all the things we want to do. It’s not going to be able to help us jump start economic development that we desperately need to do. We’re in a tough spot. I’m gonna admit that.”
“But by spending or investing up to $1.2 million for up to 15 years plus, 750 that’s going to have to come from somewhere, hopefully, CDBG, I cannot vote for that, as good of a cause as this project may be. Because I don’t’ believe we can sustain that,” Bernal concluded.
Mayor Pro Tem and District 3 Councilman Don Freitas spoke last saying, “I did ask for this to come back to the council for reconsideration. I voted for this and as we moved off from that original vote, the problem I have with this project is the rumors, the hearsay, the finger pointing, people accusing, people ripping us to pieces in public, making false accusations, lies, distortions and on and on.”
“After I approved it, come to find out, 85 of the units are for housing for the unhoused,” he stated. “The other 40 units…will be for retail. And so, this is a problem. Staff says one thing to us, Andrew Becker says another thing to us, and we’re standing there saying, ‘what’s true? What’s accurate? What’s factual?’ And for 18 months…we don’t know everything. How many times have we asked, ‘what is happening?’ Does it impact the grant?’ We’ve asked this question for months and we still don’t have an answer.”
“Why I brought this back is so, each and every one of us has a legal, fiduciary responsibility,” Freitas continued. “What’s the next step? And I don’t think my questions are out of line. I will not support something without knowing the facts. And I would say to each one of us on this council it is wrong to approve something.”
“We should care for the for the worst. We should provide housing and food and shelter education,” he said. “But there is something that we are responsible for and that is the budget. It looks like we are going to start July 1, 2027, with at least a $15 million budget deficit and…we only have a $100 million budget. That’s 15 percent. So, what department are we cutting out? Our quality of life will deteriorate and deteriorate.
“This is not a simple solution,” the mayor pro tem stated. “But I suggest before anybody makes a decision we have to…get the factual answers. This will not solve all the homelessness issues in Antioch. Let’s not kid ourselves. It may be a step forward but it’s not going to resolve anything. This is frustrating. We’ve been dealing with this for 18 months and frankly, I think we’re more confused with where we’re at and where we’re going. And the $1.2 million does not include all the administrative issues the staff has articulated. So, let’s be real about that.”
“If I had to vote, now I would vote not to go forward because I don’t have the answers to my questions and I am frustrated,” Freitas reiterated. “The human stories, the emotional stories, the tear-jerk stories, they’re real and I see it every day in this city.” Then choking up he continued, “and it tears my heart out. But I do not want to make a problem worse for our community. We are trying to respond to this issue as best we can and unfortunately, our best is not good enough for the last 18 months.”
“So, my issue is to give this one month and bring this issue back,” the councilman said, agreeing with Torres-Walker. “If the vote was tonight, I would vote to rescind. But I believe in hope and without hope, why live? This is not right for prime time. Let’s face it, it’s always an issue of money. I think it’s an obligation to move forward in a responsible manner and we’re not there.”
Torres-Walker then said, “There are deadlines and some we missed and the council was not informed of.” She reiterated the proposal to postpone the discussion and decision until the next meeting, which will be held on July 28th, and made a motion to that end. Before it was seconded, Freitas then asked to have an informal discussion with the developer and state representatives present and suggested a council meeting next week for a “round table”. Rocha suggested a study session. Acting City Manager Ana Cortez agreed and said she would reach out to each of the parties.
Director Cabral said there is a deadline, but Cortez said she didn’t see any deadline in the correspondence she had received.
Torres-Walker added to her motion to hold the study session next Monday, June 29th at 6:00 p.m.
She invited the property owner who was in attendance to speak.
He offered additional details saying, “The owner spent $40 million. The asset has not stabilized. After COVID it…is going downhill.”
In 2024, the property went into foreclosure. The same owner got it back with a different lender,” he explained. This property has had a history of financial challenges.”
“Interest rates for hotels are 10.5% to 12%. Insurance has trickled up. And the clientele we’re getting is not more than $100,” he stated.”
“In May 2025, once the resolution is passed by City it is awarded and the non-profit acquires. I have not heard that once it is awarded it comes back to council for approval. In December of 2025, the Comfort Inn flag was deflagged. It’s almost $3 to $4 million investment into the property again.
Right now, there is a notice of default filed. It is not in foreclosure. So, I think it will not be a problem. I can be there on Monday to answer your questions.”
“The problem is you said, ‘I think’,” Freitas said. “We need the city attorney to advise us.”
“I think there are philanthropic funds out there to get this project to the finish line,” the property owner added.
Freitas then seconded the motion to postpone the discussion and decision until July 28th and hold the study session next Monday at 6:00 p.m. and it passed 5-0.
Then, on quick motions and votes without any member of the public wishing to speak or comments from the members, the Council unanimously approved, under Item 5, the one-year operating budget for fiscal year 2026-27 and revised the fiscal year 2025-26 budget and under Items 6 and 7, adopted the fiscal year 2026-27 budgets and revised the fiscal year 2025-26 budgets for the City of Antioch as Successor Agency and Housing Successor to the Antioch Development (redevelopment) Agency and the Antioch Public Financing Authority (APFA).
As previously reported, “the fiscal year 2026-27 General Fund budget ended with a net deficit of $4,567,879 which was offset by a transfer from the Budget Stabilization Fund. According to the City staff report, the Council and staff worked to make $7,315,199 in “true” adjustments to the budget, after the City faced nearly a $12 million deficit.
According to the staff report, the Antioch Development Agency (Agency or ADA) was formed June 25, 1974, for the purpose of renovating (redeveloping) designated areas within the City limits. Project areas were designated to receive tax increment funds based on redevelopment formulas. The redevelopment funds were targeted for slum and blight areas. There are currently four former redevelopment areas in Antioch encompassing 2,082 acres, which is 11.6% of the City’s incorporated area.
According to the State Department of Finance, “As part of the 2011 Budget Act, and in order to protect funding for core public services at the local level, the Legislature approved the dissolution of the state’s 400 plus RDAs. RDAs were officially dissolved as of February 1, 2012,” and “property tax revenues are now being used to pay required payments on existing bonds, other obligations and pass-through payments to local governments.”
The City of Antioch elected to become the Successor Agency and Housing Successor to the Antioch Development Agency.
The APFA is a joint powers authority created between the City of Antioch and former Antioch Development Agency as a financing mechanism for real and personal property and improvements. The funds of the APFA are included in the budget document starting on page 304.
Funds of the Successor Agency and Housing Successor encompassing obligations listed on the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedules are included in the budget document starting on page 308.
Antioch Police Lt. Michael Mellone with (left) course coordinator, retired Cypress, California Police Chief Jackie Gomez-Whiteley and Dean Dave Sprott during his graduation ceremony from the Executive Leadership Institute on Saturday, June 13, 2026. Photo source: Antioch PD
By Antioch Police Department
Congratulations to Lieutenant Michael Mellone on graduating from the 2026 Executive Leadership Institute (ELI) on Saturday, June 13, 2026!
We are proud to recognize Lieutenant Mellone for successfully completing this prestigious leadership program, a partnership between the California Police Chiefs Association (CPCA) and the Drucker School of Management at Claremont Graduate University.
For those who know Mike, this accomplishment comes as no surprise. Throughout his career, he has consistently demonstrated a commitment to learning, growth, and leading by example. Whether mentoring officers, supporting his peers, or serving our community, he approaches every challenge with professionalism, integrity, and a genuine desire to make those around him better.
The Executive Leadership Institute is an intensive 14-day program that brings together law enforcement leaders from across California to develop the skills, vision, and leadership strategies needed to guide their organizations into the future. Graduating from this program is a significant achievement and a reflection of the dedication required to continuously grow as a leader.
According to the CPCA website, curriculum of this program encompasses a wide range of key topics in a Drucker inspired learning environment where the principles of management consultant, educator and author, Peter F. Drucker are imbued with a law enforcement perspective. Some of these topics include: Application of Drucker Principles to your Organization, Managing and Communicating the Police Brand to the Public, Teams in Organizations: Developing a Culture of Collaboration and Leadership, Leadership Decision Making: Introduction to Decision Science and Evidence-Based Decision Making, Creating an Exemplary Policing Organization, Changing Culture in a Police Organization: A New Path for Modern Policing; Leading Through Conflict and Diversity, Women in Leadership: Issues Facing Men and Women, Creating and Maintaining the High Reliability Organization, and Policing and Social Influence, and more.
Lt. Mellone’s investment in his professional development benefits not only our department, but also the community we serve. We are fortunate to have leaders who are committed to excellence and who never stop striving to improve themselves and those around them.
Please join us in congratulating Lieutenant Mellone on this well-deserved accomplishment. We are excited to see the continued positive impact of his leadership in the years ahead.
