Will instead include proposed Inclusionary Housing Ordinance in General Plan Update process;could come back in “a year or so”
“We need to take a comprehensive view of how all these things are going to impact our community and to do this piecemeal is wrong.” – Mayor Pro Tem Freitas
“Antioch…is still the most affordable place in the East Bay and if we don’t keep it affordable then it won’t be.” – Councilwoman Torres-Walker
By Allen D. Payton
During their meeting Tuesday night, March 10, 2026, the Antioch City Council voted 4-1, with District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker voting against, to postpone a decision on the proposed Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO) and include it in the General Plan Update process. Since, according to City staff, that process will take one to three years, it could allow enough time for the remaining proposed, new-home subdivisions in the Sand Creek Focus Area to be approved. That’s the part of Antioch where upscale homes have been planned for more than 30 years to meet the higher-end portion of the city’s housing mix.
It’s also the part of Antioch that Mayor Pro Tem and District 3 Councilman Don Freitas said he wants excluded from the ordinance.
The expectations have been the Sand Creek area homes will attract business owners to Antioch to create local jobs and employ residents in the 200-acre East Lone Tree Specific Plan area off Laurel Road near the J.C. Penney store, and allow them to escape the commutes on Highway 4 and Vasco Road. Only four more potential developments on the west side of Deer Valley Road including the Richland Communities-Leung, Zeka Ranch and Oak Hill Park LLC/Richfield-Bridle Hills projects, and one on the east side, referred to as the Chen property, located south of the Kaiser Antioch Medical Center and west of Dozier-Libbey Medical High School, are remaining to be submitted, processed and/or approved.
In addition, two more new single-family housing projects on Somersville Road, known as Rialto Place, and on James Donlon Blvd., known as Sorrento Village, are also in process, and would probably be approved before an ordinance is adopted. That would leave mostly in-fill, single-family housing and multi-family housing projects throughout the city to which an ordinance would apply. Those include five of the 10 Commercial Infill Housing Overlay District affordable apartment projects and multiple other projects, including the currently on-hold Rancho Meadows on the north side of Antioch, that have yet to be built, as well. (See related articles here and here)
Followingan hour of the staff presentation and public input, mostly by representatives of out-of-town organizations and a few residents in support, and opposition from one resident, the council then took up the matter for another hour asking questions of staff and the consultant and discussing it before the vote. (See council meeting video beginning at the 5:27:30 mark)
Council Questions, Discussion & Comments
District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha asked if the IHO would apply to developments already approved. Planning Manager Zoe Merideth responded, “This would be for new development moving forward.”
Asked by Mayor Ron Bernal about the point in time when the ordinance would be applicable to a new housing project, she responded, “It would generally be deemed complete also under SB330 if you file a complete preliminary development application, that vests your rights at the time…which are most housing projects at this point.”
Torres-Walker, referring to the comments of local homeless and affordable housing advocate Andrew Becker, was concerned “the ordinance would essentially do nothing based on the developments that are currently in the pipeline.”
“Is it a paperweight?” she asked.
“No,” was the reply from Greg Goodfellow, Associate Principal for PlaceWorks, the consulting firm that helped develop the City’s proposed IHO. “The big picture for me, here is to think of the IHO as one tool in such a large shed of tools for affordable housing.”
“I don’t do things to be symbolic. I want this to mean something,” the councilwoman said.
“My point is it’s not going to do everything,” Goodfellow responded.
Source: City of Antioch
Mayor Pro Tem Freitas then asked about the chart staff provided in their presentation showing that “there are only seven cities listed” that have IHO’s and that most had much lower percentages than the 15 percent recommended by staff and 20 percent requested by some members of the public and organization representatives.
“That’s not all of them. Those were just examples,” the consultant stated. “I don’t know the exact number. I’m sorry.”
Freitas then mentioned, “The City would have to hire three to six individuals to oversee this,” and the fact the City is facing deficits this and next year. “Where would we get the money?” he asked. “Would we get it out of the (IHO) Trust? The Trust can’t pay those fees?”
“No,” Goodfellow responded. “This IHO…could be taken care of with the leadership of existing staff.”
Part of the costs of the annual review for the program would be covered by developer fees Merideth explained.
A discussion over adequate staffing for all housing programs in the city ensued.
Freitas then asked about the need outlined on page 8 of the staff report for “additional building height” to accommodate density increases “required to make rental projects feasible” and “potential parking regulation exemptions.”
“What concerns me is engineering says, even if you approve this project, you are at Level F for traffic. That’s gridlock,” the councilman stated. He was referring to, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Level of service for traffic flow, which measures automobile congestion and travel time delay, on a scale of A, which is the best, to F, which is the worst.
“I’m concerned that the qualify of life in Antioch will deteriorate,” Freitas added. “The citizens of Antioch I know, they don’t want to have high-density, three- and four-story buildings. They don’t.”
“Antioch, historically, since I was born here, has always been a haven for affordable housing,” he continued. “Yes, I know it’s screwed up, now. But is it going to help us or hurt us?”
“We are now going to be doing the General Plan, number one,” Freitas stated. “Number two, we do have Senate Bill 300, Senate Bill 330 and now we have a proposal on inclusionary housing. We need to take a comprehensive view of how all these things are going to impact our community and to do this piecemeal is wrong.”
“The reality is, we do have an issue of affordability,” he said. “My feeling is, this is not the place, tonight to make that decision. Our legal requirement is to do the study. We have fulfilled that. But I believe we fold it in to the General Plan review.”
“I want staff to tell me how are we going to oversee this. How are we going to implement this. We have no plan,” Freitas continued. “It’s just a policy, let’s do it, let’s put it in. That’s irresponsible as far as I’m concerned.”
“It’s an amazing study,” he said. “I just think it would be wrong to approve this tonight.”
Freitas Says Ordinance Shouldn’t Apply to Sand Creek Area Developments
“The other problem to me is….quote, unquote, it is citywide,” Freitas said about another of his concerns with the ordinance. “I spent three years of my life doing the last General Plan (which was adopted in 2003 when he previously served as mayor)…and we consciously made a decision that there are parts of our community we don’t want high rises, we don’t want high-density. We want executive housing primarily in the area which was Urban Area number one, the Sand Creek Area. I don’t think this should be applied citywide.”
“We need to make some qualitative judgments and some areas I don’t think it should apply,” he reiterated. “Because I think cities want the whole gamut…from executive housing to absolutely affordable housing.”
“I guess I’m frustrated with this. I think it’s the wrong approach. I think we need to delay this,” Freitas stated. “I think we need to fold it into the General Plan and do a much better job of how we’re going to pay for this because it’s not here. Reading this report scares me more than anything with how we’re going to financially do it and the exemptions that are being called out.”
“Thank you for letting me rant and rave,” he concluded to laughter from Torres-Walker and others. “I’m OK. I feel good,” he said with a smile on his face.
Torres-Walker States Her Support
The District 1 councilwoman then said, “I support this. I always have. Antioch…is still the most affordable place in the East Bay and if we don’t keep it affordable then it won’t be. I know there is definitely NIMBYism (Not In My Back Yard) that exists in the city. I know there are places people do not want this kind of housing and we have to figure things out. I think this is important.”
Then speaking of the staffing issue to support the proposed IHO and City’s other housing programs Torres-Walker concluded, “I don’t think residents who are trying to afford to live in Antioch should have to suffer because we haven’t figured out our institutional challenges.”
Wilson Supports Inclusionary Housing “Whenever” Council Votes
District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson spoke next saying about Torres-Walker’s comments, “a lot of it I agree with.” Then to Freitas she said, “I get your frustration…but on the other hand we need affordable housing. I hear about people who are either couch surfing, living in their homes, living on the street and they have a job. We need to do something. I get we need to have a plan with programs that are going to work, be successful and be maintainable. We need to do something for housing to be affordable.”
“I support this. Regardless, if we vote on it today or whenever, I’m in support of inclusionary housing,” Wilson concluded.
Rocha Supports “the Concept” But Approving it Now Would be “Winging It”
Rocha spoke next saying, “I support the concept all along. But I have more questions and concerns about…how we do it right, how we structure it.”
“So, if we’re going to vote tonight, my answer would be ‘no’,” he stated. “If we’re going to have staff look at it, get some feedback to look at how we can make it feasible, workable for us, with staffing, with all of the questions that have come up, then I can consider that.”
“Looking at this, tonight, I can’t support this vote, tonight based on so many questions and concerns,” Rocha continued. “Otherwise, I think we’re just winging it.”
Freitas then said, “I’m generally supportive, but, you know, we have to do it right. We all support affordability. In my opinion, this is too critical to screw up.”
Staff Says General Plan Update Will Take “Two to Three Years”
Torres-Walker then asked staff, “How long is it going to take to finish the General Plan?”
Interim Community Development and Economic Development Director David Storer responded, “We’re saying anywhere from two to three years depending on the process.”
Bernal Also Supports Including IHO with General Plan Process
Mayor Bernal then weighed in saying, “My biggest concern with this…is the fact that we’ve been thrown for a loop when it comes to the housing legislation that has come out of Sacramento. We’ve only had two projects approved, we have eight or 10 in the pipeline. We have three-story units going up right in the back of residential on Golf Course Road which is going to be a nightmare firestorm.” He was referring to the Joyfield at Lakeview Center Apartments for extremely-low, very-low and low-income residents.
“So, we don’t even know the impacts of current legislation on our city let alone adding one more moving part to it that’s just going to complicate things,” the mayor continued. “The other part of this, and I keep harping on it, is we need to get our budget under control…in order to know where we’re headed as a city, how we’re going to afford to pay for things like extra staffing.”
“The other thing that has always frustrated me is RHNA (Regional Housing Needs Allocation) numbers are just dumped on us,” Bernal stated. “We’re going after these arbitrary numbers that a group in the larger Bay Area (speaking of MTC & ABAG) has come up with and I don’t know if that’s what’s best for our community.”
“I know it’s what we’re mandated to do but I don’t know if that’s best for our community. That’s where the General Plan comes in and I think that folding this in with the General Plan process…,” concurring with Freitas. “Because what the General Plan process is going to do is tell us how many units we have left in our 25-year building sphere that we’re going to be building, that then we would know how many units we’re going to get out of this. Right now, there isn’t any certainty of that.”
“My point is I think there are a lot more questions than there are answers,” he continued. “I think there are a lot of moving parts, right now, when it comes to Sacramento, development and how it’s going to impact Antioch with so much vacant land and so much residential opportunity, and I just think this would add one more element of complication to it.”
“So, I’m not going to be supportive of moving it to a date certain…because I don’t see the benefit or the purpose of it,” Bernal concluded.
Housing in Land Use Element of General Plan Update Could Be Done in “a Year or So”
Freitas then confirmed with Storer, that the first of seven issues to be dealt with during the General Plan Update is the Land Use Element, which includes housing policy, and said, “Some of the questions we’re all asking…I think we could move that forward…we could bring back the IHO within a year or so for action.”
Bernal then advocated to “bring it back organically when it’s time.”
Freitas then asked City Manager Bessie Scott, “Does the city manager want to offer any words of wisdom?” to which she simply replied, “Um, no,” to laughter from the council members and those still in the audience as it was after 11:50 p.m.
“That’s called a wise city manager,” Bernal stated in jest.
Freitas then made the motion to move the item off-calendar, “with the understanding that the General Plan will prioritize this entire discussion.” Rocha seconded the motion and it passed 4-1 with Torres-Walker voting “no”.
By Acting Lt. Gary Lowther #4032, Antioch Police Field Services Division
On Tuesday, March 10, 2026, at around 11:22 p.m, Antioch Police Officers responded to reports of gunshots and a man down in the parking lot on the 600 block of Wilbur Avenue.
Officers immediately rendered first aid to an 18-year-old man suffering from two gunshot wounds until the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District arrived. He was transported to a local trauma center, where he remains in critical condition.
Antioch Police Officers secured the scene and collected evidence related to the incident.
2025 Antioch Youth of the Year and Deer Valley High School junior Amanda Brown. Photo: AUSD
Also, congratulates Citizen of the Year Allison Norris who works with students
By Antioch Unified School District
Big congrats to Amanda Brown, who has been named Antioch Youth of the Year.
The Deer Valley High student has a long list of titles and accomplishments, including Senior Class President, Leadership team member, and community volunteer – all while balancing a full course load at DV and dual-enrollment at Los Medanos College.
Amanda gained an even bigger group of admirers during last year’s Special Olympics, where as emcee she showcased her energy, compassion, and natural stage presence. She went on take the lead role of many district events, including the Day of Empowering Girls day-long workshop last fall.
Her influence and commitment to positive change led the DV administrative team to unanimously select her for the Superintendent’s Student Advisory Council.
Said DV’s Mike Green: “Before becoming a vice principal, I had the privilege of teaching Amanda. Even then, it was clear she was a student who stood out. You know when a young person is truly different; someone destined to make an impact. Amanda has always been that student. She represents our school with honesty, insight, and a willingness to celebrate successes while addressing areas for improvement — qualities that embody true youth leadership.”
Also in the winners’ circle is Allison Norris, founder of Snug as a Bug foundation. She has partnered with many AUSD students, including Antioch High and Bidwell, to provide handmade items for youth in distress.
The annual Chamber Gala and Awards dinner is set for March 27 at Lone Tree Golf and Events Center. For ticket info, visit https://antiochchamber.com.
First, a Contra Costa Sheriff’s Cadet (left), then an Antioch Police K9 Handler with Danto (right), Loren Bledsoe, seen handing out Christmas gifts (center), ends his career as a sergeant. Source: Antioch PD
Leaves after 20 years on the force with “invaluable lessons, cherished friendships and a deep love for this community”
By Antioch Police Department
Sgt. Loren Bledsoe in a patrol vehicle. Photo: Antioch PD
After 20 years of service, Sergeant Loren Bledsoe is hanging up the badge.
He first served as a Cadet with the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office.
Since joining the Antioch Police Department in 2005, Sgt. Bledsoe served our community in many roles including Patrol Officer, Field Training Officer, Detective, K-9 Handler with K9 Danto, and Sergeant in Professional Standards, Investigations, and Patrol. He also served on the Mutual Aid Field Force.
As a Robbery/Homicide Detective, he worked some of the department’s most serious cases, helping bring answers and justice to victims and their families.
Bledsoe also served as Vice President of the Antioch Police Officers Association.
Twenty years of service.
Twenty years of commitment.
Twenty years protecting Antioch.
Thank you for your leadership and dedication, Sergeant.
Enjoy your well-earned retirement.
When reached for comment Bledsoe said, “I am grateful to have been part of this incredible journey, taking with me invaluable lessons, cherished friendships and a deep love for this community and the members of the Antioch Police Department.”
Antioch Water Treatment Plant Superintendent Marcus Woodland will be honored next month. Photo: City of Antioch
Marcus Woodland to be honored as Exemplary Operations Supervisor
By Jaden Baird, PIO, City of Antioch
ANTIOCH, CA — The City of Antioch announces that Marcus Woodland, Superintendent of the Antioch Water Treatment Plant (WTP), has been selected by the American Water Works Association (AWWA) to receive the Exemplary Operations Supervisor Award. He will be formally recognized at the Water of the West Conference in San Diego this April.
The award recognizes outstanding leadership, operational excellence, and dedication to public health in water utility operations.
Woodland’s leadership was instrumental during the construction and startup of Antioch’s Brackish Water Desalination Project. Throughout complex upgrades and plant shutdowns, he ensured strict compliance with public health standards, requiring proper disinfection and bacteriological testing before treatment processes were returned to service. His attention to detail and insistence on operational readiness protected both system reliability and water quality for the community.
In one instance, Woodland directed a shutdown and inspection after plant staff noticed abnormal filter flow readings following construction work. A foreign object was discovered lodged in a flow meter, an issue that could have caused long-term performance problems and potential public health concerns if not corrected. His leadership ensured the issue was resolved before the system resumed operation.
Woodland also led improvements that strengthened long-term plant maintenance and reliability. His team implemented design changes to the membrane clean-in-place system to allow multiple tanks to operate simultaneously and accelerated critical repairs to sedimentation basin equipment at Plant B to ensure full treatment capacity during renovations at Plant A.
In addition to operational leadership, Woodland played a key role in hiring, training, and mentoring operators as the facility expanded to include reverse osmosis treatment systems. He worked closely with staff and equipment vendors to ensure operators fully understood new processes and equipment, often requiring additional training to ensure the highest operational standards.
During a complex raw water pipeline tie-in that required the shutdown of both of the City’s treatment plants, Woodland coordinated extensive preparation, including operational testing, distribution system planning, and collaboration with neighboring agencies to secure backup water supplies. His oversight and planning allowed the City to maintain service despite an outage that extended well beyond the planned timeline.
Woodland stepped into the role of WTP Superintendent during the height of the desalination project’s construction—his first appointment as a full-time permanent superintendent. His leadership during this challenging period was widely regarded as a key factor in the project’s successful completion.
“Marcus Woodland’s recognition by the CA-NV AWWA reflects his outstanding leadership and technical expertise,” said Scott Buenting, Director of Public Works. “Marcus has played a pivotal role during the complex construction and startup of the Brackish Water Desalination Project. The success of our Water Treatment Plant is a direct result of his commitment to operational excellence and to providing safe, reliable drinking water to our community. We are proud to see his dedication recognized at the state level.”
The American Water Works Association is an international nonprofit organization dedicated to improving water quality and supply through education, standards development, and professional recognition of water professionals. The Exemplary Operations Supervisor Award honors individuals who demonstrate exceptional leadership in water utility operations and a strong commitment to public service.
Woodland’s recognition highlights the City of Antioch’s continued commitment to protecting public health and investing in reliable, high-quality water infrastructure.
Allison Norris (Herald file photo) and Joanne Bilbo (photo courtesy of Antioch Sports Legends) will be honored as Antioch’s 2025 Citizens of the Year at the annual Chamber Gala & Dinner on March 27th.
Antioch Chamber of Commerce announces other community award winnersincluding Businesses, Non-Profit, Youth and Veterans of the Year
To be honored at 2026 Gala & Awards Dinner
By Allen D. Payton
The Antioch Chamber of Commerce has announced Allison Norris and Joanne Bilbo as the 2025 Antioch Citizens of the Year as well as other winners of the annual community awards. Honorees will be celebrated at the 2026 Gala & Awards Dinner, Friday, March 27th.
CITIZEN OF THE YEAR 2025
Most Impact 2025
Allison Norris
Lifetime Achievement
Joanne Bilbo
BUSINESS OF THE YEAR 2025
Small Business
Almost There Travel Agency
Large Corporation
US Bank
NON-PROFIT OF THE YEAR 2025
SHARE Community – Homelessness Resources
YOUTH OF THE YEAR 2025
Amanda Brown – Deer Valley High School
ANTIOCH LIFETIME VETERAN OF THE YEAR 2025-2026
U.S. Army Veteran Bob Franchetto
ANTIOCH VETERAN OF THE YEAR 2025-2026
U.S. Army Veteran Ricky Diaz
The Veterans of the Year winners were announced, previously, during the Antioch Veterans Day ceremony on Nov. 11, 2025.
Annual Gala & Awards Dinner
The Annual Gala will include the Awards Ceremony, Silent Auction, Golden Tickets, 50/50 Raffle, No-host bar, Music by DJ GBaby and Dinner Buffet:
Fresh baked garlic rolls & garlic butter
Italian green salad with vinaigrette
Lone Tree Caesar salad with marinated tomatoes, croutons & shaved parmesan cheese
Proposed Plan for housing, transportation, the economy and environment in the nine counties will go to committee for review on Friday, March 13
Offers strategies, investments and outcomes for Contra Costa County
By John Goodwin, Assistant Director of Communications & Leslie Lara-Enríquez Assistant Director, Public Engagement, Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Plan Bay Area 2050+ is the latest long-range plan to guide growth and investment across the region’s nine counties and 101 cities. The plan seeks to advance an integrated vision for a Bay Area that is affordable, connected, diverse, healthy and vibrant for all by 2050. It focuses on the four areas of housing, transportation, the economy and environment.
The Contra Costa Centre Transit Village. Photo credit: Karl Nielsen
The plan and its related reports will be presented for review and consideration at a joint meeting of the MTC Planning Committee with the ABAG Administrative Committee on Friday, March 13, before the documents are referred to their respective approving bodies. The ABAG Executive Board will consider certification of the Final EIR and adoption of the final plan at its March 19 meeting. At its March 25 meeting, MTC will consider certifying the Final EIR and adopting the final plan, as well as adopting the accompanying Air Quality Conformity Analysis and an amendment to the 2025 Transportation Improvement Program.
The release of the proposed final Plan Bay Area 2050+ follows a 59-day public comment period for the Draft Plan and the Draft EIR that closed on December 18, 2025. The proposed final plan and Final EIR have been updated to reflect feedback received during the public comment period.
The map above shows Contra Costa County’s Growth Geographies, which are areas identified in Plan Bay Area 2050+ to help guide future housing and job growth. These areas are designated by local jurisdictions or based on their proximity to transit and access to opportunity. Source: MTG/ABAG
The Plan includes Partner Resources: Regional Tools for Local Action that local jurisdictions and partner agencies can use to develop plans, seek funding and take action to make a better Bay Area. It offers a fact sheet for each county, including Contra Costa, which spotlights strategies, investments and outcomes.
Plan Bay Area 2050+ is the latest long-range regional plan for the nine-county Bay Area. The plan lays out a series of funding and policy strategies that can create a more affordable, connected, diverse, healthy and vibrant future for all Bay Area residents in 2050. Unique to this plan cycle is the parallel Transit 2050+ planning effort, which culminated in the first-of-its-kind plan to re-envision the future of Bay Area public transit, in partnership with transit agencies across the region.
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance will require developers to privately-subsidize housing bysetting aside 15% of new units for low-income buyers/residents or pay a $200K per unit fee
Will also establish affordable Inclusionary Housing Trust Fund requiring more City staff
Building Industry says ordinance not state required, will have opposite effect
“The higher the inclusionary requirement, the fewer market-rate homes are constructed” – UC Berkeley, UCLA joint study
Participants might not be allowed to keep increase in equity, but share it with City instead
By Allen D. Payton
During their meeting tomorrow night, Tuesday, March 10, 2026, the Antioch City Council will require new home developers to set aside 15% of housing units for Very Low-Income, Low-Income, and Moderate Income households. Although it’s not required by the state and opposed by the Building Industry Association of the Bay Area, on February 4, 2026, the Planning Commission voted 4-0, with two members absent, to recommend the City Council adopt an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO). The IHO would apply to both single-family homes and both for rent and for sale multi-family projects.
Antioch would be only the eighth city out of 19 to approve such an ordinance.
Program Participants Might Not Get to Keep Equity Growth or Must Share it With City
The lower-income homebuyers who would participate in and benefit by the program would be able to purchase the same home as their neighbors but at a much lower price. Yet, when they sell the home, they might only be allowed to keep the amount of their original downpayment but not receive any of the increase in equity as the home must be resold to another buyer who qualifies, whenever the sale occurs “in perpetuity”. The other option would be the seller would have to share the increase in equity with the City.
Section 3.3 DISPOSITION REQUIREMENTS of the Financial Feasibility Analysis for the ordinance reads:
“An inclusionary ordinance will likely require that households purchasing an affordable unit qualify based
on income and that the sales price qualify as affordable to that household. The program will also have to identify what restriction, if any, will be applied to future resales of these affordable units. Different state and federal programs have different requirements.
We recommend that the city’s ordinance restrict future resales so that the purchasing household also be income-qualified and the sales price represents an affordable housing payment for the purchasing household. We further recommend that this restriction be enforced by a deed restriction for a period of 45 years. This would be consistent with some federal affordable housing programs, but it is worth noting that it is unlikely that federal funding would be involved with mixed-income inclusionary housing projects.
As an alternative, Antioch could consider using provisions similar to the State Density Bonus Law. The original purchaser would still have to be income-qualified and the sales price would have to be qualified as affordable to the purchasing household. The purchasing household would not be restricted from selling the property in the future at then market-rates or to selling to households that are not qualified as low income. However, there would be an equity sharing agreement, and the city would receive the amount of the original sales price write-down and a proportional share of any appreciation in value. Antioch could then use its share of the sales price to support other affordable housing projects and programs.”
However, the proposed ordinance in Section 9-5.4308 – Ongoing Affordability and Occupancy reads, “A. Ongoing Affordability of For-Sale Units. In order to maintain the availability of For-Sale Inclusionary Units constructed pursuant to this Article, the affordable sales prices of for-sale Inclusionary Units shall be restricted in perpetuity, and reset upon resale of the unit(s), as documented through an Inclusionary Housing Agreement, as prescribed in Section 9-5.4305.F, recorded against the property.”
Program Details, Previous Findings Stated Antioch IHO “Not Warranted…Not Reasonable”
According to the City staff report for the agenda item, #8, an IHO is a zoning tool that requires developers to allocate a percentage of housing units in market-rate developments as “affordable”, or below-market rate (BMR) units. Many HOs include the option of paying a fee (“in-lieu” fee) rather than building the required affordable units onsite.
Inclusionary ordinances require that a specific percentage of units in market-rate development projects be offered at below market rates, typically to Very Low-Income (VLI), Low-Income (LI), and Moderate Income (MI) households (see below for definitions). These percentages are known as inclusionary requirements.
Developers would be given the option to instead pay an in-lieu fee, which is proposed at $202,500 per unit, and the City would collect the fees and be deposited into an Inclusionary Housing Trust Fund (IHTF) to be used for affordable housing purposes. The purpose of the IHTF is to assist in the creation and preservation of affordable housing in the City of Antioch for the benefit of extremely low, very low, low and moderate-income households.
The staff report also explained that Antioch has considered adopting an IHO since approximately 2009. Past City leadership concluded that market rate housing in Antioch was already adequately affordable. In 2016, the Contra Costa Grand Jury released a report titled Where Will We Live: The Affordable Housing Waiting List Is Closed. The report recommended that Antioch should consider adopting an IHO. The City responded to this recommendation on August 9, 2016, stating that the City, assuming 2000-2009 home values, “already provides a diversity of housing options and is accessible to households of all income levels…” Therefore, an IHO was “not warranted and is not reasonable.”
IHO Income Levels
The Area Median Income (AMI) per household in Contra Costa County is $159,800. The three categories of affordable housing typically accommodated in IHOs are:
Very Low-Income (VLI) Housing. Units affordable to households earning 0-50% of the Area Median Income (AMI).
Low-Income (LI) Housing. Units affordable to households earning 51-80% of AMI.
Moderate Income (MI) Housing. Units affordable to households earning 80-120% of AMI.
The State also recognizes Above-Moderate Income Housing, which are units affordable to households earning more than 120% of AMI. However, this affordability level is not provided for in IHOs.
Proposed Ordinance Applies Citywide Including New Sand Creek Area Subdivisions
The proposed City of Antioch Inclusionary Housing Ordinance is composed of the following basic regulations:
Applicable Geography. The proposed IHO requirements apply to Residential Development Projects citywide.
Affordability Term. The proposed IHO requires all BMR units to be affordable in perpetuity.
Threshold Project Size. The proposed IHO requirements apply to all Residential Development Projects consisting of five or more units.
Income and Affordability Requirements. As proposed, 15 percent of all new Residential Development Projects shall be affordable to VLI and LI incomes.
Specifically:
Ten percent of the BMR units shall be affordable to VLI households.
Five percent of the BMR units shall be affordable to LI households.
The first BMR unit shall be affordable to VLI households, the second unit shall be affordable to LI households, and so forth for all the BMR units in the project.
Affordability Standards. The proposed IHO includes standards to ensure that affordable units are of the same quality as Market Rate Units. Per the IHO, all affordable units shall:
Be built in the same proportion as the Market Rate Units.
Have an average square footage of at least 90 percent of Market Rate Units with the same bedroom count.
Be developed with the same bedroom count ratio as the Market Rate Units.
Have the same quality of exterior design and overall quality of construction as the Market Rate Units.
Have the same quality and type of interior finishes and features as the Market Rate Units.
Meet all site, design, and construction standards included in the City’s Building Regulations, Planning and Zoning.
Only seven other cities out of 19 in the county, plus, the County have IHO’s. Source: City of Antioch
Planning Commission Recommendations
During the Feb. 4th Planning Commission meeting one member of the public opposed the IHO with six members of the public representing coalitions of housing advocates spoke in favor. A letter in support was submitted by Joey Flegel-Mishlove, East Bay Housing Organizations, on behalf of California Center for Movement Legal Services, Contra Costa Budget Justice Coalition, East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy, East Bay Housing Organizations, Ensuring Opportunity Campaign to End Poverty in Contra Costa County, Hope Solutions, Lift Up Contra Costa County, Monument Impact, Multi-Faith ACTION Coalition, Public Advocates, Rising Juntos and United Latino Voices of Contra Costa County. They wanted to set “the IHO’s overall inclusionary rate at 20%.”
The Commission provided recommendations and requested that the City Attorney review them prior to the City Council reviewing the IHO including:
That the housing units created with the IHTF shall be prioritized for residents of Antioch.
However, the City Attorney responded, “the City of Antioch generally cannot lawfully adopt a broad resident-priority rule for assistance funded by inclusionary in-lieu fees, particularly for homebuyer subsidies. California law strongly protects statewide housing objectives and fair housing principles, and such a preference would likely conflict with those goals.”
That the IHO and IHTF gives preference to local unions.
But the City Attorney responded, “the City of Antioch cannot lawfully require private developers to give priority to union labor over non-union contractors on inclusionary housing projects. Such a requirement would first be preempted by federal law under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which governs private-sector labor relations and occupies the field to the exclusion of most local regulation.”
Developers’ Share Concerns
According to the staff report, during a December 2024 workshop, local housing developers “stressed that the difficulty of qualifying for home loans may impede the function of an IHO. Per participants, lower income households in Contra Costa typically face severe economic barriers to mortgage qualification, including an adequate down payment. As such, requiring the construction of for-sale units for very low-income or low-income households may be an unproductive path toward privately subsidized affordable housing.”
Building Industry Says IHO’s Aren’t State Required, Don’t Work, Benefits “Lucky” Few
In a letter to the council members and commissioners for the study session during the Planning Commission meeting on April 16, 2025, the Eastern Division of the Building Industry Association of the Bay Area submitted a letter opposing the ordinance saying they aren’t required by the state and they don’t work, making the cost to build the market rate housing to high.
The letter reads, “the California Housing & Community Development staff informs us that no jurisdiction is required to study the feasibility of an inclusionary ordinance or adopt such a program as part of the housing element review process.”
The BIA letter also includes a policy brief published in 2019 and updated in 2021by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University which “found that none of the six major studies of inclusionary programs show that they increase the housing supply or lower prices. Instead, much of the research comes to the opposite conclusion: Except for a very small number of people lucky enough to secure one of the affordable units, inclusionary programs cause overall housing prices and rents to rise, further reducing affordability for everyone else.”
“‘Relying on new housing construction to provide subsidized units is not a strategy that can lead to more housing that’s affordable for more people,’ wrote research fellow Emily Hamilton. ‘In cases where inclusionary zoning raises house prices generally, the costs of the policy fall hardest on the lowest-income.’”
An IHO “improves housing affordability for a few at the risk of worsening affordability for many, and it taxes precisely the activity needed to ameliorate the housing shortage and bring down rents: development.”
The BIA letter also states, “a 15 percent inclusionary requirement is infeasible for all single-family large lot developments and only partially feasible for single-family small lot and townhome developments. On the rental side, only high-density multifamily projects are fully feasible for very low, low and moderate income households. The market for very dense rental housing in Antioch is limited, at best. Overall, adopting a 10 or 15 percent inclusionary requirement will result in fewer homes being built in Antioch.”
The BIA requests City “staff to work with the development industry on alternative incentive-based approaches.”
Local Real Estate Broker Says IHO “Unnecessary”, “Built on…Fundamentally Socialist Ideology…Failed Model”
In a letter to the Commission, local real estate broker, Mark Jordan wrote, “an inclusionary housing ordinance is unnecessary, unsupported by current case law, and of questionable constitutional validity. Adoption of this ordinance would expose the City to avoidable legal and financial risk.” His letter cited a successful lawsuit against City of East Palo Alto and as a result, “significantly modified its inclusionary housing ordinance” and possibly paid the man who sued that city.
In a previous email to the City Council dated Sept. 15, 2025, Jordan wrote, “Though rarely stated outright, the lnclusionary Housing Ordinance is built on a fundamentally socialist ideology-one that demands others pay the price for systemic outcomes beyond their control. But socialism, like Marxism, is a failed model. It doesn’t uplift communities; it burdens them and eventually collapses under its own weight.
“If life hasn’t turned out the way we want, the answer isn’t to demand others pay the price. The answer is to adapt, to work harder, to upskill, to disengage from distractions-and to pursue our own happiness through self-reliance.
“In closing, I urge you to table this ordinance. It is ill-timed, legally risky, economically unwise, and ideologically misguided.”
Antioch Housing Already Affordable, Hundreds of Units Already Approved or in Approval Process
The City is already meeting its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) requirements for very low- and low-income housing. A total of 1,248 new housing units are required in those categories. Yet, as previously reported, over 2,000 apartment units have either been or can be approved by staff through the 10 Commercial Infill Housing Overlay Districts about by the City Council in 2022, many of which will be affordable, including in the extremely-low, very-low and low-income housing categories.
In addition, according to Redfin.com, “The housing market in Antioch, CA, is currently competitive, with homes selling for a median price of $603K. The market is somewhat competitive, with homes selling in about 40 days on average. The median sale price per square foot is $306, down 3.2% since last year. In December 2025, Antioch home prices were down 1.2%.”
Finally, according to Realtor.com, “The housing market in Contra Costa County, CA, presents a range of home values and prices. As of February 2026, the median price for a single-family home is $780,000, with a median AVM value of $801,000 for properties sold in the last year.” According to RocketMortgage.com, AVM value is “an estimated property value generated by an Automated Valuation Model using algorithms and real estate data.”
Questions for Mayor, Council Members
An email was sent to the mayor and four council members Monday afternoon, asking questions about the ordinance:
They were asked, “since it’s not required by state law why do you feel an IHO is necessary in Antioch, since our city is already going to have at least five if not 10 more affordable housing apartment complexes as part of the Commercial Infill Housing Overlay Districts?”
They were also asked, “why does the proposed ordinance apply citywide and therefore include the remaining Sand Creek Focus Area developments that have yet to be approved, when those homes have long been intended to be the more upscale, higher priced homes for that end of our housing mix?”
Finally, they were asked, “why use this option to achieve the RHNA requirements when Antioch homes are less expensive than the average throughout the county?”
No responses were received to the email and further efforts to contact each of the council members were unsuccessful prior to publication time. Please check back later for any updates to this report.
Council Meeting Details
The Council meeting begins with a Closed Session at 4:30 p.m. for a Conference with legal counsel regarding “significant exposure to litigation.”
That will be followed at 5:00 p.m. for a Special Meeting/Study Session on the fiscal year 2026-27 budget and an update on the Code Enforcement Division’s progress and operations.
The regular meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. The latter two meetings will be held in the Council Chambers at 200 H Street, or can be viewed via livestream on the City’s website or on Comcast cable TV channel 24 or AT&T U-verse channel 99.
