By Alma Galvan, Regional Marketing & Communications Director, Better Business Bureau San Francisco Bay Area
SAN FRANCISCO, CA — Better Business Bureau (BBB) is warning consumers about an alleged cryptocurrency investment operation involving BG Wealth Sharing LTD and the DSJ Exchange platform.
Since May 2026 BBB has received several Scam Tracker reports from local Bay Area consumers who reported losing a combined $69,706.60. All reports were submitted by adults age 65 or older from Alameda and San Francisco counties.
According to the reports, consumers were introduced to the opportunity through relatives, friends, or local recruiters. Four consumers reported attending presentations at a Denny’s restaurant in Hayward, where participants were shown how to open and fund accounts and use trading “signals” or codes on the DSJ Exchange platform.
Consumers reported initially depositing between $2,000 and $5,000 through cash or cryptocurrency. Some said they gave cash to another participant or intermediary who converted it to cryptocurrency and funded their DSJ account.
The consumers described seeing their account balances increase as they copied and pasted trading codes provided through an online group. Some reported being promised daily returns, bonuses, or additional trading signals for recruiting new participants.
When consumers attempted to withdraw their earnings, however, they reported that withdrawals were frozen or unavailable. Several said they were instructed to pay an additional “tax” equal to 12% of the total balance displayed in their account before their funds could be released.
One consumer reported that a $5,000 initial deposit appeared to grow to more than $24,600. The consumer was then instructed to pay nearly $3,000 more before attempting a withdrawal. The consumer refused to pay and reported being unable to access the displayed balance.
“Consumers should never have to send additional money or cryptocurrency to pay a supposed tax before withdrawing their own funds,” said Alma Galvan, Regional Marketing and Communications Director for BBB SF Bay Area. “A growing balance displayed on an investment platform does not necessarily mean that the money exists or can be withdrawn. Be especially cautious when an opportunity relies on recruiting friends and family or promises unusually consistent returns.”
The reports received by BBB are consistent with concerns raised by securities regulators in several states. The Texas State Securities Board issued an emergency cease-and-desist order involving BG Wealth Sharing and DSJ Exchange, alleging an operation that used recruitment incentives, misleading account dashboards, withdrawal restrictions, and demands for an additional 12% “exit tax” or “compliance fee.”
The State of Hawaii also issued a preliminary cease-and-desist order alleging that BG Wealth Sharing and certain promoters solicited and offered unregistered securities. Securities regulators in Utah and Washington have issued investor warnings regarding BG Wealth Sharing and DSJ Exchange.
BBB cautions that this warning concerns BG Wealth Sharing LTD and the DSJ Exchange platform described in the reports and regulatory actions. It should not be confused with unrelated businesses that use similar names.
BBB recommends the following precautions:
Verify the investment and seller are properly registered.
Be skeptical of guaranteed or unusually consistent returns.
Research opportunities independently, even when recommended by someone you trust.
Avoid investments that reward recruitment.
Never give cash to someone to invest on your behalf.
Do not pay additional taxes or fees to withdraw funds.
Be cautious of unfamiliar platforms; displayed profits may be fabricated.
Consumers who believe they have lost money should immediately stop sending funds and contact their bank, cryptocurrency exchange, or payment provider. Preserve screenshots, messages, transaction records, wallet addresses, receipts, and information about anyone involved. BBB encourages consumers to submit scram reports to:
Victims should also be alert for recovery scams. Individuals claiming that they can hack a blockchain, retrieve cryptocurrency, or recover lost funds in exchange for an upfront payment may be attempting to victimize them a second time.
ABOUT BBB:Better Business Bureau‘s mission is to be the leader in advancing marketplace trust by setting standards for ethical business behavior, encouraging and supporting best practices, celebrating marketplace role models, calling out and addressing substandard marketplace behavior, and creating a community of trustworthy businesses and charities.
Two of the owners, Ron and Jamie Harrison, and the operators, (L-R) Roger Born, son of Sheri Vallero and her daughter, Terriane Reed, invite the public to their Grand Opening of Mac’s Old House on Saturday, Aug. 15, 2026. Instagram video screenshot.
Under new ownership and management; renovated 101-year-old building, kept same menu
“A labor of love. I did this for my grandchildren,” – co-owner, Joe Martinez
“This is an opportunity for Jamie and me to get one of the last historic places in Antioch,” – co-owner Ron Harrison
By Allen D. Payton
After closing in June 2025 and following the purchase late last year and renovations this year, the new owners and operators of Mac’s Old House will hold a Grand Opening of Antioch’s iconic restaurant Saturday, August 15 at 4:00 p.m. The new owners are Ron and Jamie Harrison and Joe and Desiree Martinez. Sheri Vallero, who also runs Mel’s Diner in Antioch, and daughter, Terriane Reed and son, Roger Born, are the operators.
A drawing of the original owner and namesake, Floyd ‘Mac’ McKinney, hangs inside the front entrance of the restaurant. All photos by Allen D. Payton
Locally famous for their dine-in, family-style prime rib and pasta dinners, “The story of Mac’s stretches back to 1925 when Floyd ‘Mac’ McKinney built the house with his father. In 1956 he began to operate a bar out of a converted part of the home. He operated it for 17 years before selling it and retiring,” according to a report by onlyinyourstate.com. “The restaurant changed hands a few times after Mac, but (the previous) owner bought it in 1983.”
During a soft opening dinner for friends on Tuesday, Aug. 4, Ron and Joe shared their thoughts and excitement about the restaurant.
Co-owners Ron and Jamie Harrisons with two of the three operators, Sheri Vallero and her son, Roger Born during a soft opening dinner on Aug. 4, 2026.
“Joe and I are friends, and I work with him a lot,” Ron Harrison said. “We started talking about it and said, ‘why don’t we buy it?’ To us it’s an historical place.”
Harrison’s other business partner, “Sean (McCauley) and I have so many places out here. This is an opportunity for Jamie and me to get one of the last historic places in Antioch,” he continued.
Keeping their same menu means prime rib and pasta dinner will continue to be served.
“We lease the restaurant to Sheri and required her to keep the same name and menu,” Harrison stated. “We added 15 feet to the back for a bigger kitchen. More parking stalls. Two new beautiful bathrooms.”
“We got all the smoke off the walls and added all new lighting picked out by Desiree,” he shared. “We kept the bar. We wrapped all the beams. We tried to keep it as original as possible. The building is 101 years old.”
“We worked with the City staff and leaned on them as much as possible,” Harrison added.
Co-owner Joe Martinez was joined by friends during a soft opening dinner on Aug. 4, 2026. His wife Desiree was unable to attend.
“This is my first venture together with Ron,” Martinez said. “I bought the property and brought Ron in. I knew I wanted this project. I met with (former owners) Gary and Sue Noe and worked things out.”
“Starting in November I’ve been working on this every day since. A labor of love. It turned out good,” he continued. “We did a complete restoration. I told Gary and Sue, my goal is to honor the legacy of Mac and the family and continue it.”
“I put my heart, soul and love into it,” Martinez shared. “My wife and I picked out all the finishes.”
“The plan is to keep it for the next 40 years, the next generation,” he stated. “Nobody else was going to do it with all the cost involved. I put in my sweat equity. Ron took care of all the City stuff and laid out the plumbing and kitchen. I did all the construction. I’m happy it’s done.”
“I did this for my grandchildren as a family trust,” Martinez added.
Mike and Elisa Van der Valk, of Mike’s Pastry Shop in Antioch, and others enjoy the renovated bar at Mac’s during a soft opening dinner on August 4th.
See a video by the Harrisons showing a tour of the restaurant and announcing the Grand Opening, here.
For now, the restaurant is open daily for dinner from 4:00 – 10:00 p.m. Beginning Monday, Aug. 17, Mac’s will open for lunch from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. They now accept debit and credit cards for payment.
City Park and new signage got the thumbs up but the River Town Square project was given a big thumbs down from a majority of the Antioch City Council Members during their meeting Tuesday night, Aug. 11, 2026. Sources: photo and sign rendering by City of Antioch, site plan by Save The Yard.
Postpones, will study resuming security services for downtown
“This is one thing that unites people that don’t usually get together.” – resident Frank Sterling about support for the proposed downtown park
“We do not have $250,000 to spend to maintain this park. If we do, every other park is going to have a reduced level of maintenance.” – Mayor Ron Bernal
Freitas envisions a hotel with conference center on the former Beede Lumber Yard site
By Allen D. Payton
In spite of impassioned comments from a broad spectrum of residents in favor of using state funds for a new park on the site of the former Beede Lumber Yard in downtown, to their chagrin, during the regular meeting on Tuesday, August 11, 2026, the Antioch City Council voted 4-1 to apply for the grant to benefit City Park. Only District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha voted against the motion. Most of the public speakers spoke in favor of the proposed, new downtown park, including representatives of two groups of residents, one wearing blue shirts with the message, “Rivertown Square Yes!” printed on them and the other from Rising Juntos wearing green shirts, and others who aren’t usually allied on the same side of major issues. (See related article)
During Council deliberations on the matter, both Councilmembers Tamisha Torres-Walker, in whose District 1 both sites are located, and Don Freitas hemmed and hawed in their willingness to support the Rivertown Square project before ultimately voting to pursue the funds for City Park, instead.
Public Comments
Before the vote on item #8 on the agenda, members of the public spoke mainly in favor of using the state grant funds for the Rivertown Square.
“I’ve watched cities that have grown their downtowns…and I think, ‘why not us? Why not Antioch?’” said one downtown resident. “Downtown once had a green space at Barbara Price Marina Park and we were promised a replacement.”
“Please choose the Yard,” she added.
“This is our neighborhood. I have been fighting for The Yard…this is one of the longest fights I’ve been doing,” said resident Frank Sterling. “This is one thing that unites people that don’t usually get together. I feel like you all should be bold. I’m in favor of The Yard being our downtown…community space.”
Resident Michael Simpson, wearing one of the blue shirts compared it to Concord’s Todos Santos Plaza, Oakley’s Civic Center and Brentwood’s downtown City Park, as well as Pittsburg’s Old Town park.
“We should…create something for future generations,” he stated.
Barbara Price Marina Park was six acres, and the Beede Lumber Lot is just under two acres, one third the size, so, the maintenance costs will be less, another resident pointed out.
“We have waited long enough. This community has spoken. Please don’t let maintenance be the issue. Please honor the commitment. Please apply for the grant to be at the Rivertown Square,” she concluded.
“Antioch shouldn’t be the city people drive through but the city people drive to,” another resident wearing one of the blue shirts in support of the Rivertown Square stated.
Former Planning Commissioner Kerry Motts, also wearing a blue shirt in support of the project for which his sister, former councilwoman and current District 1 council candidate, Joy Motts has helped lead the effort, said, it “would provide for enhanced economic vitality of Rivertown. This has been a stated goal…for 40 years.”
A leader of Rising Juntos East spoke “in support of developing the Beed Lumber Yard park.”
“Please vote yes for the families of north Antioch,” she added.
“Children and families need safe spaces to thrive,” another representative of Rising Juntos said in support of the Rivertown Square. “We envision not just a park but a cultural hub.”
“Why is it taking so long?” she asked. “Making the lot a park would make the downtown more walkable and enjoyable. It’s right across the street from the Senior Center. They could enjoy it.”
Another member of Rising Juntos said, “City Park needs investment and our community absolutely needs to see it improved. But one park should not be sacrificed at the expense of another.”
Alexander Broom, Vice Chair of the Antioch Parks and Recreation Commission, said, “I think it should be Beede Lumber Yard or bust. I believe we should put all of our eggs in this basket.
District 4 Council candidate and local homeless advocate Andrew Becker spoke last with a completely different idea saying, “My concern is that the intent of Prop. 4 is to…preserve or create open space for individuals and I keep hearing, tonight it’s a once in a lifetime opportunity. In the 1940’s, homes were built along Cavallo (Road). There’s still no parks within a-half a mile.”
District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker participated in the meeting remotely via Zoom. However, the background photo is something she chose as she was not in the Marin Headlands but at a resort and spa in Santa Cruz at the time. Video screenshot.
Council Discussion & Decisionfor City Park
During council discussion Acting Community Development Director Steve Scudero was asked by Mayor Ron Bernal about the vacant downtown lot, “How is that property zoned?”
“Mixed use which allows for commercial residential and public spaces,” Scudero responded.
“If we wanted to sell that property as a surplus property…” Bernal began.
“We would have to make it available to an affordable housing builder…giving a sixty-day notice of availability… before selling the property,” Scudero stated.
District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha spoke next saying, “Both parks are important. I believe City Park does need investment. But we have a downtown area that many of us…for enrichment would see where people could come together and bring some economic development.”
“It’s unfortunate we have to pick just one. It looks like both projects meet the criteria for the process,” he continued. “Whatever we decide tonight won’t determine what would happen to the other.”
“Probably the one thing I’ve been most impressed with…over the years I’ve heard about The Yard, the Town Square,” Rocha stated. “I’m inclined to support The Yard because of the engagement that’s bringing people together. This may be four years down the road even if we get the funding.”
“I understand the value of bringing people together. I could support both. But I’m going to support the Beede Lumber Yard because of all the engagement,” he added. “I don’t think there’ll be a problem with getting the people behind you.”
District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson said, “Both are good. But I want to put one in that’s most competitive and going to get the dollars.”
Alex Gibbs, Grants Director of Townsend Public Affairs, the City’s consultant on the grant process, said, “There will be a lengthy process…that will include site visits from the state…most likely in April next year. You’re looking at really a difference of five or six points. There are fewer people living near the Yard…given the location of the lot near the river. But the state takes that into consideration. That’s the reality we’re living in. I’m confident that either case…we can write a very competitive application. The only thing you’re going to lose out on is the number of people living in poverty and nearby park land.”
Wilson asked about the Cavallo Road area saying, “That space we don’t own. It’s not a park,” referring to an empty, privately-owned lot on the southeast corner of Cavallo Road and E. 18th Street.
“I’m not aware of any land we own in that area,” Scudero stated.
District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker, participating remotely from a resort and spa in Santa Cruz, then said, “I keep saying, don’t put housing there. I also don’t agree that housing should be the priority for this site.” She then said, “I keep hearing, it’s been 15 years they’ve had the commitment to replace the Barbara Price park that they lost. That seems to be a theme I continue to hear…that people have been waiting…for something.”
“I definitely want us to award whatever can bring revenue to the City of Antioch and I’m hearing the Beede Lumber Yard could bring revenue and even cover its maintenance costs,” Torres-Walker continued. “This is potentially an $8 million grant. We could submit one application or two applications.”
“Anything is possible,” said Recreation Department Director Shahad Wright. “Whatever money we have…we’ll make sure the contingency fund will be enough to cover.”
“It will be a city park not a neighborhood park so it would include restrooms,” Torres-Walker stated.
“That will be part of the design process,” Wright responded.
“If Beede Lumber lot is selected tonight, there will be a design phase, a community engagement phase, restrooms. What would be the follow up for City Park?” she asked.
“I will pivot and figure out how to fix the rest of the parks in the city,” Wright stated. “You have up to four years to spend the grant funds.”
The councilwoman then mentioned “downtown business owners” dealing with “parking issues and unhoused folks who actually live along the waterfront” and giving enough time for the City to deal with those issues.
District 3 Councilman Don Freitas said, “We’ve talked a lot about history. Some of us have intimate knowledge of history. I want to go back to 1978 and 1979. I was the Executive Director of the Antioch Chamber of Commerce and most of our members were in downtown. Because at that time it was still one of the economic hubs of the community.”
“I told them, ‘the downtown could survive if we had residents moving into the downtown and…sustained economic development,’” he continued.
“We needed to improve the circulation pattern in the downtown area. As mayor…from 2000-2008, whe number one project was to finally connect A Street to Second Street,” Freitas stated. “That was probably one of my greatest achievements as mayor. Because downtown finally had circulation.”
“So, on the issue of the Beede Lumber Yard…and this has been an issue for over 40 years, my vision for Beede Lumber was that we need to make downtown a destination, and we needed to generate revenue,” he explained. “I’ve seen many people say on social media that Freitas wants to build apartments. Freitas has never been for building apartments” on the vacant lot.
“My vision was to build a Sheraton Inn like in Concord…that Antioch would own the property and reach out to owners of hotels…two to three stories with a rooftop garden,” Freitas shared. “I wanted to have a situation where we would have a 35-year lease. I never wanted to sell that property…and each and every year we would generate revenue.”
“We have more than 118,000 people in this town. There is no hotel in this town for us to offer conferences or seminars or anything. So, part of my argument was, let’s build one,” he continued. “If you’re there for two to three days, what are you going to do? You’re going to walk up the street. We could have a jazz lounge. We would have restaurants there.”
“You say you’ve been disappointed for 15 years. I’ve been disappointed for over 50 to 60 years,” Freitas exclaimed. “You say this is going to produce revenue. To do that you’d have to be using this facility every day. That’s not going to happen. Excluding the 4th of July, you’re going to get a couple hundred people. Very few people come out of District 3 to the downtown because there’s nothing there for them.”
“We have Williamson (Park). What’s the problem? There’s no parking,” he asked and answered. “If Beede goes through, the problem is going to be parking.”
“I have seen your schematics. Very interesting. But it’s not going to sustain itself,” Freitas stated. “But you’ve done a very good job coming together and advocating. I think I can count the votes. I think we’re going to probably engage Beede. But be under no delusion. The best bet is not Beede. The best bet in my opinion is City Park.”
“But I’m going to challenge every single one of you here. There’s going to be community meetings. You’ve said, ‘we can raise money through non-profits…through other means.’ Don’t wait,” he said. “That’s been the problem with this city. I challenge you, start figuring out how to pay for this on a long-term basis.”
“We are in a deficit. We’ve reduced it dramatically,” Freitas pointed out. “Your organization is great…you have another part of the job. Don’t abandon us. Stay with us. I challenge you. Where are all these other monies going to come in? Because the city doesn’t have it.”
Mayor Ron Bernal spoke next reiterating Freitas’ last point saying, “The Council chose to remove this project from the Capital Improvement process because we didn’t have the funds for maintenance. If this goes through, we still won’t have the money for maintenance. We do not have $250,000 to spend to maintain this park. If we do, every other park is going to have a reduced level of maintenance.”
“We have deferred maintenance coming out of our ears,” he stated. “I am not in favor of adding another expense…as much as people would love to have this park built in downtown,” he continued.
“We’re talking about one point being the difference in getting this funding. We don’t have five points,” Bernal explained. “And that (City) park won’t be improved and we won’t have Beede, either.”
“The new areas are fully paying for the maintenance of their parks. The downtown area parks, the General Fund is paying for their maintenance,” he continued.
“We do need to improve our downtown…have places for people to gather. I’m for all of that,” Bernal said. “This is an example of everyone coming together. But we don’t have the…wiggle room in this process. So, I’m going to be in favor of City Park.”
Torres-Walker than said, “I didn’t hear that we only had to submit one application. I heard we could do two applications. Was that correct?”
Gibbs of Townsend said, “That is correct. There is no limit to the number of applications the City can submit.”
“Would the Council be against submitting two?” she asked.
“I would be opposed to that,” Freitas said. “I think Townsend has made the case not to do that.”
“I think there would be a staff issue in running two processes. How well would you be able to run two processes?” Bernal asked.
“It’s a heavy lift,” Director Wright said. “We’re already understaffed and two facilities down. How well can we do in this small timeframe?”
Freitas asked, “What is in the best interest of Antioch?” then said, “I’m going to move that we do apply for this grant for City Park.”
Bernal seconded the motion.
Torres-Walker than stated, “For Townsend said, ‘this takes a while to bring this process around.’ I’ve been for bringing grants to the City. Do you see there will be opportunities in the future…can there be a commitment to pursue grant funding for parks?”
“I can commit to purse the best grant application as possible…I commit to not leaving any stone unturned…be it state, federal or other,” Gibbs said.
The motion then passed on a vote of 4-1 with Rocha voting against.
In response, one member of the audience could be heard yelling out, “There are elections coming up.”
Sources: Top – Antioch Herald file photo. Bottom photo: City of Antioch
Postpones Resuming Downtown Security Services Until September to Study Issue
Two residents spoke during public comments on the item, #9 on the agenda, local homeless advocate and District 4 Council candidate Andrew Becker said, “I managed a private security company…for years. I think…the biggest question is…what’s very alarming is staff puts out the report that includes the security logs. But there’s no results. ‘We as staff are doing a good job…that the work should continue in downtown.’ It’s staff’s responsibility to monitor and maintain contracts.”
“I went through all of the security logs,” he continued. “It speaks to a high volume of emergency calls…I think you see four or five very low instances in the hundreds of logs put out. The contract is for City-owned parking lots. If that’s the case, then why are the photos…of properties the City doesn’t own in downtown? Or pictures of properties that aren’t even in downtown….a shopping center in a newer development? Where are these guards and who are we paying and what is the relationship of this company to the City?”
Keith Butler, CEO and Founder of Elite Defense Security Solutions said he had, “ties to prior law enforcement. I’m a retired law enforcement officer of 18 years.”
“Without getting into the particulars of the current company…it’s not who’s providing the security, it’s what does the security look like. You need to look at what that security can do,” he continued.
“I have to agree with the previous speaker,” Butler stated. “There were a lot of items on there that don’t look to be parking lots.”
He then offered to help the City draft a new RFQ (request for quote).
Council Discussion & Decision to Postpone After Meeting with Downtown Businesses, City Staff
During Council discussion, Freitas spoke first saying, “I think that when we initially did this, we did focus on the City-owned property. If we want to put together a work group…we didn’t receive any input from the Police Department…Code Enforcement, the Antioch Chamber of Commerce, the Downtown Antioch Association. We need to ask questions…be proactive rather than reactive.”
Rocha then said, “One key strategy identified…is to act as a visible deterrent…and properly report incidents to the Antioch Police Department. When you read the comments from the survey…the key strategy is to be visible when people don’t even know they’re there. Maybe this is misleading the way the key was written.”
“I think the merchants and restaurant owners are wanting to have a relationship…that didn’t happen with this particular vender,” he continued. “I do think we need to have community members meet together. I think there needs to be dialogue. I’m not prepared to approve this contract.”
Wilson then said, “We didn’t include any measurables…around patrol hours…how to communicate with the police. I think if we have this committee we figure out the performance measures. That’s the problem with the RFQ. I think we really missed it on this one.”
Finance Director Dawn Merchant, serving in the role of acting city manager for the meeting (or Acting Acting City Manager she jokingly said) then shared, “One of the difficulties I do recall being discussed was how can the City pay for extra security for businesses in downtown when they don’t for another challenged area in the City. That’s why it was focused on the City-owned parking lots. That’s how this evolved.”
Torres-Walker mentioned, “the businesses saying, ‘we need more support from the City.’ The police saying, ‘we can’t just commit officers to downtown’. We couldn’t justify doing it for the businesses. We asked if there were other City-owned parking lots throughout the city.”
“What is being often overlooked is…it just provided patrol for City-owned parking lots in downtown not the businesses,” she continued. “When I looked at this report…at least one property outlined in here that is way over by Deer Valley. How did they end up all the way over in District 4?”
“The survey was completed by seven respondents…out of fifty or more in downtown,” Torres-Walker stated. “You have 71% of the respondents said they would support the City continuing security services in downtown. It is very telling. The majority of businesses that responded felt like security services were needed for weekdays and the evenings and special events.”
“Asked how often they see security services downtown it was pretty spread out. You never had ‘never or occasionally.’ Although you had one outlier say they had seen the security company several times a week,” the councilwoman shared.
She then mentioned the only cannabis retail location in downtown and that, “they’re supposed to have 24-hour armed security.”
“I do want to add patrolling for downtown businesses,” Torres-Walker stated. “Most municipalities have a downtown overlay district where the businesses pay for additional police patrols” and mentioned using “CSO’s (Community Service Officers) driving around in marked cars.”
She concluded by suggesting forming a “police district in the waterfront.”
“This could be a collaborative effort of the City and downtown businesses that they pay for this,” Freitas said. “I think it’s in their best interest. I just think we should try to get them together…with the City Attorney. It’s an idea to move forward. Because we don’t have the services right now, the question to the police department is, are there other personnel that can be used such as VIPS. I think we need to be a little creative.”
Rocha agreed with using CSO’s.
Antioch Police Captain Matt Koch jokingly said, “In the words of Director Wright, ‘anything is possible.’”
“We’ve already increased our presence over there with officers and CSO’s during all hours of the day and night that are scheduled,” he stated. “I went 42 days before and 42 days after and there’s been a 23% increase in calls for service to the police department. It’s about three-and-a-half to four-and-a-half calls for service per day. I think having them there…with the lights flashing is a deterrence. It is a great service and a force multiplier for us.”
“There are some residences besides the businesses that are affected there,” Koch continued. “At my request they were taking pictures and providing them to the department.
“So, you see the security as a benefit overall,” Bernal asked.
“Overall, yes,” Koch responded.
“As they’re driving different routes between the parking lots there’s nothing that precludes them from making calls if they see something,” Bernal said.
“Yes,” Koch stated.
“I would like to see something done in the month of August,” Bernal stated. “I just think we need to do something quickly.”
“I do think we need to pursue another request for qualifications,” Torres-Walker added.
There will be a DAA meeting on the 19th at El Campanil Theatre,” the mayor stated. Torres-Walker said she will be attending that meeting.
Rocha said he will speak with the Chamber of Commerce. Bernal suggested Freitas do so, as well.
The council members agreed to have representatives from the Antioch Police Department, Code Enforcement meet and downtown business owners to discuss the needs for private security.
Map of CRPC’s 35-mile Union Island Pipeline of which 8.5 miles runs through Antioch. Source: CPRC
Mentions opportunity to negotiate new franchise agreement
Company’s attorney refutes City staff’s portrayal of continued operation during litigation
By Allen D. Payton
During their meeting on Tuesday, July 28, 2026, the Antioch City Council voted 4-0 to deny the Encroachment Permit Appeal of California Resources Pipeline Company, LLC (CRPC), owner of the low-pressure, natural gas pipeline that runs under the city and has been shut off since 2021. (See related articles here, here and here)
In introducing the public hearing on the matter, under item #6 on the agenda, Antioch Public Works Director and City Engineer Scott Buenting said, “An Encroachment Permit is not the appropriate process.”
Dean Persinger,Vice President of Operations and Ester Brawley, VP of Technical Operations for California Resources Pipeline Company (CPRC) provided the company’s presentation.
He said the company applied for the Encroachment Permit “to maintain the right-of-way.”
Assistant City Attorney Kevin Kundinger spoke on behalf of the City saying, “The City requests the city council denies the appeal and uphold the decision of the City Engineer.”
“An encroach permit is not the appropriate approach for this long-term encroachment…for a project of this magnitude. It’s normally used for a short time and limited scope,” he explained. “They wanted to continue to pump gas…when before in order to do that they had to through the franchise agreement process.”
Kundinger also pointed out the company continued to operate the pipeline although the city council majority in 2021
“Even if you were to find the process is appropriate, CRPC failed to comply with the code,” Kundinger added. “This was an end route around” the council’s decision to not renew the franchise agreement, he stated.
Public Comments
During public comments, resident Harry Thurston spoke of his concerns about safety as the pipeline runs near homes and Sutter Delta Medical Center.
Bob Brown spoke next “on behalf of the Western States Petroleum Association” about the “safety and jobs” and that “The pipeline is safe and well-maintained. “Safe and reliable energy are essential” and asked the council to allow it to resume operations.
Resident Mark Jordan said, “This is a situation where both sides are right and both sides are wrong. The last council and a group of people decided we didn’t want petrochemicals running through our city. If it’s not organic, it’s not stone…it has petrochemicals in it. To believe that we don’t need pipelines is wrong.
“We’ve been told that they ran gas through that pipeline after they were denied. That’s disconcerting,” he continued.
“Where you are is, the juice isn’t worth the squeeze. You’ve been in court running up bills,” Jordan stated. “You want it solved? You put them in a room with a representative from the city and mediator. I’ll do it.”
“They’re going to have to pay a penalty for using that pipeline after they no longer had a franchise agreement,” he continued. “I support giving them a franchise agreement. The way to go is ‘what’s in it for us’? They’ll pay, because they want it and because they make $3 billion a day (as an industry). We need petrochemicals and they need their pipeline. They can just load up a thousand trucks and run them down our street and there’s nothing you can do to stop them? What’s the better way to move the petrochemicals?”
“He wants to cut a deal. Let’s do it,” Jordan concluded.
Timothy Jeffries spoke on behalf of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers saying, “I’m here as a worker…maintaining this infrastructure. It supports high-quality jobs, family-supporting wages…right here in this city.”
Resident Jan Warren said, “I want to support Harry Thurston’s comments. I hear these same stories at the Air District, the legislature bill sessions. I don’t believe any job is being created here in Antioch by that 8.5-mile pipeline.”
“Thank you, City Attorney and City Manager for saying, ‘no’ when they didn’t follow the rules,” she continued. “They’re trying to work their way around. It’s time to deny…this appeal.”
Former Councilman Ralph Hernandez said, “I’m with the City, the appeal should be denied” claiming it’s “a very dangerous transportation of natural gas. Don’t let a big corporation come here and basically bribe you with what they want. I don’t know what the potential danger these pipelines create. Think of the city and its safety and whether it’s a good thing or not.”
Mark Hughes said by Zoom (which is now allowed by state law), “I’m the Executive Director of the Industrial Association…in the Bay Area…in support of the encroachment permit.” He also mentioned, “California has the strictest…regulations in the nation and the world.”
“It actually results in an overall increase in greenhouse gas emissions,” he added.
Resident Frank Sterling, also speaking via Zoom, said, “I’m going to speak out against the pipeline.” He referred to the explosion of the pipeline in San Bruno. “I’m just against it.”
APOC Vice Chair Devin Williams said, “I’m against this pipeline, as well. I actually live in District 4 and there’s a pipeline running through my community.”
Resident Andrew Becker spoke last during comments saying, “I’ve lived next to this pipeline for the past 30 years…and what I really think about is…the only thing I’ve really seen changed is the sidewalks lift and cracked, yet there’s yellow stakes telling us there’s a pipeline undergound. I can assume it’s being maintained.”
He mentioned his appliances being gas powered and said, “Should this pipeline go away and other pipelines go away, my bill’s just going to go higher and higher.”
“Somebody in this city is not negotiating properly. Along with maintaining the pipeline, maybe they can plant some flowers,” Becker concluded.
CRPC Attorney Refutes City Staff’s Comments on Continued Use of Pipeline
The proponent had five minutes for a rebuttal comment in which their attorney used it to explain the company’s continued use of the pipeline after the council denied the renewal of the franchise agreement for its use in 2021.
Michael Mills, outside counsel to CRPC mentioned “a letter sent to staff and council, yesterday. Most importantly, it’s been now, almost five years, that the prior council decided to reject the franchise agreement. Since then, there’s been litigation.”
“The company negotiated a series of extensions to continue to operate the pipeline,” he explained. “The judge invited the City to enjoin the company from operating the pipeline during the legal challenge, but it did not do so.”
“Up until the point the company lost the legal challenge to the denial the company operated the pipeline. It wasn’t correctly stated in the staff report,” Mills pointed out.
“The company very much wants to work out something with the City,” the company’s attorney stated. “That’s the entire reason we’re here asking you for this permit.”
Council Discussion and Decision to Uphold Staff Denial
During council discussion, District 3 Councilman Don Freitas said, “The issue for the council is on the recommended action. Is an Encroachment Permit appropriate? The answer is ‘no’.”
“It’s simply about whether an Encroachment Permit is the proper process,” Kundinger said.
“I do think it’s creative,” Freitas stated. “Let’s not make it difficult. Let’s not bring in these other issues.”
“The company is not precluded from asking the city to sit down and discuss a franchise agreement,” he continued.
“The company has not been operating the pipeline for several years,” Freitas stated.
“I cannot confirm or deny if they have been using it. I have no personal knowledge,” Kundinger responded.
“How much in mitigation fees would we get?” District 4 Councilwoman Wilson asked.
“I believe the original was $75,000,” Kundinger said. That was from 2016-21. “Those were amounts fixed by agreement.”
“If a franchise agreement were in place, then an encroachment permit would be appropriate?” Mayor Ron Bernal asked.
“Permission could be given through a franchise agreement, yes,” Kundinger responded.
The motion by Freitas to uphold the city staff denial of the encroachment permit passed 4-0.
Map of the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration-regulated pipelines that run in and through Antioch. Source: CRPC
Will also end five-year lawsuit against City; but City staff claim company continued unauthorized use of pipeline
By Allen D. Payton
During their meeting tonight, Tuesday, July 28, 2026, the Antioch City Council will vote on the Encroachment Permit Appeal of California Resources Pipeline Company, LLC (CRPC), owner of the low-pressure, natural gas pipeline that runs under the city and has been shut off since 2021.
As previously reported, after operating for 30 years without incident, the 35-mile-long pipeline, including the 8.5-mile section through Antioch, that run from Union Island in the Delta to Pittsburg and serves the Chevron oil refinery in Richmond, the CRPC’s Franchise Agreement expired on February 7, 2021. On or about February 10, 2021, CRPC applied to renew the Franchise for an additional 10-year term that would run from February 7, 2021, until February 7, 2031. On September 28, 2021, the City Council voted 2-3 not to approve the proposed ordinance that would have granted CRPC’s requested 10-year renewal and the Franchise Agreement remained expired. Current Councilmembers Monica Wilson and Tamisha-Torres Walker were joined by then-Mayor Lamar Thorpe in voting against renewing the franchise agreement. Then Councilmembers Lori Ogorchock and Mike Barbanica voted to renew the franchise agreement.
The 12.75-inch pipeline, buried at a minimum of four feet, carried 1.8 million cubic feet of natural gas daily which is enough to supply about 9,000 homes. It’s one of many natural gas pipelines that run through the city.
In the past, the council’s renewal votes had been non-controversial, and the annual franchise fee only generated $16,871.90. Wilson led the effort in Antioch following the lead of Brentwood Councilwoman Jovita Mendoza. Their council, also on a 2-3 vote, opposed renewing that city’s franchise fee renewal in May 2021, even though only a small portion of the pipeline runs through their city.
Torres-Walker claimed, “Environmental injustices exist all around us and they impact frontline communities the most,” as a reason to oppose the franchise agreement renewal. She also called the pipeline, “dangerous” even though, “The pressures are 50% below the allowable pressures” and “The volumes are very low” a CRC representative explained.
Increased Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Also, as previously reported, shutting down the pipeline actually increased greenhouse gas emissions as 50% of gas now supplied to CRPC’s customers in Contra Costa originates in Canada as much as 3,500 miles away instead, about 80% is from fracking and some of the gas has to be transported via truck.
Tuesday Night’s Agenda Item
Under Item 6 on Tuesday night’s agenda, City staff are recommending “that the City Council affirm the City Engineer’s denial of the Encroachment Permit Application submitted by…CRPC in June 2022.”
• On or about June 29, 2022…CRPC’s predecessor-in-interest, California Resources Production Corporation, applied for an encroachment permit to maintain its existing Union Island Pipeline within the City’s public right-of-way.
• CRPC’s application included all information required by the City’s form, including necessary renderings, a surety bond, and proof of relevant liability and property insurance.
• On May 15, 2023, the City Engineer denied the application solely on the basis that two years prior the City Council had voted to deny CRPC’s franchise extension application.
• On May 22, 2023, CRPC timely appealed the City Engineer’s decision.
• Because the City Engineer did not have substantive comments or technical conditions to place on the permit application as a basis for rejection, the City Engineer had a duty to grant the permit.
• The Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (“PHMSA”) audits pipeline records, inspection programs, safety protections to prevent leaks or overpressures, operating procedures, training, and emergency response programs. The UIP inspections demonstrated:
• 2015 – No findings or violations.
• 2018 – No findings or violations.
• 2024 – No findings or violations.
• 2022: Independent consultants, Bear, INC., at the direction of the City of Brentwood, conducted a safety assessment of the pipeline. The assessment involved evaluating previous pipeline inspections and concluded: “Overall, this pipeline is well maintained, in good condition, and has had more inspections than the average pipeline, and the inspections were sufficiently thorough.”
“Without UIP, the Richmond refinery must import its natural gas, making California’s fuel supply more expensive,” the CRPC presentation concludes.
City Claims CRPC Continued Unauthorized Use of Pipeline
However, the staff report claims, “The City Engineer did not err in concluding that CRPC’s Encroachment Permit Application was in conflict with the City’s Encroachment Regulations. Specifically, as detailed in the May 15, 2023 written denial letter provided to CRPC, CRPC continued to use the Union Island Pipeline on City owned and/or controlled property without authorization after the expiration of CRPC’s Franchise with the City on February 7, 2021.
“This use continued after the City Council voted not to extend the Franchise on September 28, 2021 – and thus after the City expressly declined to re-authorize CRPC to use the City’s rights of way for the purpose of operating the Union Island Pipeline. This use also continued after the City Engineer sent a notice of termination informing CRPC that it was excluded from further use of the public highways, streets, alleys, and public places which it was previously granted permission to use under the Franchise Agreement. The City Engineer knew that CRPC’s continued use of the Union Island Pipeline was the subject of ongoing litigation between the City and CRPC wherein the City contends CRPC’s continued use of the City’s property is an unauthorized encroachment.
“As such, the City Engineer fairly concluded that denial was warranted because CRPC’s Encroachment Permit Application – submitted while CRPC was encroaching on the public right of way and did not have the City’s consent – was in conflict with the City’s Encroachment Regulations, and in particular with Antioch Municipal Code sections 7-2.204 and/or 7-2.304.”
Council Options
The current council majority can either vote to approve the appeal and renew the franchise agreement or deny the appeal, continue being sued by CRPC and keep the pipeline shuttered.
Meeting Details
Following the 6:00 p.m. Closed Session meeting, the regular meeting will begin at 7:00 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.
Calling all Antioch businesses and residents! We are asking for your donations or support of a fundraising opportunity for the DAA!
Gladys Torres of Timeless Elegance Vintage Store (at 204 G Street) and Alliance Estate Sales has offered to coordinate this online auction, and others will be assisting with the tasks of taking pictures and gathering items. We are looking for 50 or more items by Friday, July 17th which will bring interest to the auction.
They can be vintage or collectible items, gift certificates, raffle baskets, services, luncheons with City leaders, etc.
Please message Debbie Blaisure or Gladys Torres with any items or questions or let us know in the comments what you might want to donate to coordinate with us. Half of the proceeds of the item can go to the donor or you may donate the full amount to the DAA!
Let’s work together to raise funds for future events by the DAA. For more information visit https://downtownantioch.com.
