Include former mayor, council members, former and current commissioners

Freitas’ nominees will be on next Tuesday’s agenda

By Allen D. Payton

During their regular meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 28, 2025, the Antioch City Council Members nominated and voted to appoint their respective Standby City Council Members who are only activated for the continuity of government in the event of a catastrophic emergency and the sitting member is unable to perform their duties. As such, the appointments are largely ceremonial. The mayor and each of the four council members could nominate three Standbys who are not activated in the event of a “regular” vacancy in a council seat.

According to the city staff report for agenda Item 9, Pursuant to State Law (California Government Code Sections 8635-8644 entitled, “Preservation of Local Government), Article 6 of Title 2 of the Antioch Municipal Code provides for the appointment of Standby City Council Members “in the event of a declaration of emergency and a Council Member is unavailable due to being killed, missing or having an incapacitating injury.” The provision for Standby Council Members allows for the continuity of government in the event of a catastrophic emergency.

Each council member shall nominate three standby members and shall indicate the order of priority of each standby member. Consideration shall be given to places of residence and work, so that the greatest probability of survivorship or availability shall exist. While not required, priority shall be given to city residents who are at least 18 years of age and are registered voters. The City Council shall then appoint the nominees as Standby Council Members.

Standby Council Members may become activated during a state of war emergency, a state of emergency or a declared local emergency. No standby member shall become a member of the City Council unless there is a declared emergency described above. The mere vacancy of the regular Council member’s office absent a declared emergency shall not activate the standby member.

The first priority standby member shall serve during the emergency if his or her regular member is unavailable, meaning that the regular member is killed, missing, or so seriously injured as to be unable to attend meetings and otherwise perform duties. Any question as to whether a particular member is unavailable shall be settled by the remaining available members of the Council, including standby officers who are serving. If the first priority standby member is unavailable, the second priority shall serve, and so forth. Standby members shall serve at the pleasure of the governing body appointing them and may be removed and replaced at any time with or without cause.

• Mayor Ron Bernal nominated the following Antioch residents: 1) Robin K. Agopian; 2) Former Antioch Mayor Pro Tem and Councilman Manuel Louis Soliz, Jr.; and 3) Former Antioch Police Crime Prevention Commission Chair Sandra Gail White.
• Mayor Pro Tem and District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha nominated: 1) Former District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica; 2) Former Councilman Tony G. Tiscareno; and 3) Antioch School Board Area 5 Trustee and former Mayor Mary Helen Rocha.
• District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker nominated: 1) Antioch Police Oversight Commissioner Leslie May; 2) Raymond Rodriguez; and 3) Antoine Watt.
• District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson nominated: 1) Former Police Oversight Commissioner Harry Thurston; 2) Police Oversight Commission Vice Chair Devin Williams; and 3) Police Oversight Commission Chair Porshe Taylor.

District 3 Councilman Don Freitas had not yet nominated his Standby Council Members as of the Jan. 28th meeting. However, his nominees are: 1) his wife, former Antioch Councilwoman Cathryn Radin Freitas; 2) Thomas A. Hartrick, IV; and 3) Antioch Sports Legends Co-Founder Thomas W.J. Menasco. The council will vote on their appointments under Item 2.O. on the Consent Calendar during next Tuesday’s meeting, Feb. 11.

Changes only one of eight requested conditions

By Allen D. Payton

During their regular meeting on Tuesday, January 28, 2025, the Antioch City Council on four 5-0 votes approved the latest new home development project in the Sand Creek area, after almost 31 years of planning. The 294-unit Albers Ranch project, which will include a future commercial area and senior care facility on Deer Valley Road received overwhelming support from the community. Many of the members of the public spoke in favor of the project due to the senior care facility and many asked the council to waive the eight conditions of approval requested by the developer, Lucia Albers. But the council only included one exemption, for the Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) road on her property, off of Deer Valley Road.

Albers Ranch Project Approved 5-0 with One
Following the Proclamations under Item 1 on the meeting agenda, District 3 Councilman Don Freitas asked the council to move up the public hearing on the Albers Ranch new home development project under agenda Item 5.

“Lucia Albers has been waiting 31 years,” he said. “We have about 20 people in the audience who have to get up early in the morning.”

The council approved moving up the item to be discussed before Item 2, Announcements of Civic and Community Events and the remainder of the agenda.

Former Antioch Mayor and BART Board Director, Joel Keller, Albers’ consultant on the project, spoke on her behalf. He read a letter by Albers outlining all the problems she’s faced through the years, as previously reported.

All But One Public Comment in Support
The first resident to speak was local businessman Jim Lanter saying, “I’ve never got involved in projects. This one kind of struck my nerve because of the assistant living portion. I think every project going forward in Antioch needs a component for assisted living because we don’t have the space. There aren’t the rooms. It will do one thing. It will provide more and provide competition which will drive down costs.”

“I’m kind of concerned about the future date. I’m hoping we can peg that. We’d love to continue to live in Antioch,” he added.

Ray Devlin, a commercial real estate agent with Collier’s said, “Lucia Albers has hired me to sell her project. It’s an absolutely beautiful project…beautiful property because of the hillsides. With the hillsides come costs. The conditions of approval will be handed off to our hopeful, homebuilder. Those costs will be handed off to the 294 folks who will be buying the homes, there. As Joel said, many of the conditions of approval add needless costs to the project.”

Eric Haynes, a business representative with Sheetmetal Workers #104, said he was, “representing hundreds of Antioch residents…speaking as an advocate for high-quality union construction. I’m here asking you to support Albers Ranch. It’s a multiple generational project…it allows seniors to stay in the neighborhood as they age.”

“Hundreds of area residents will be employed for the construction. Many will be apprentices…meaning more training for youth,” he added. “I would also ask for the conditions of approval to be waived. Please approve this.”

Former Antioch Mayor Pro Tem, Councilman, and local investment advisor, Manny Soliz, Jr. spoke next saying, “I’ve been a friend of Mrs. Albers and her late husband for many years. This project has been on the books for 30 years. Could you imagine if you wanted to put in a new driveway or patio at your house, you paid your fees and then a list of things was added that you had to check off? That’s a long time, 30 years. I think the additional conditions for the project should be waived. Anything added to the project will make it more expensive to build on that land.”

“Those units are going to be more expensive and artificially so,” he continued. “I’m looking at it more fundamentally. I think any of us who buy a house or buy a piece of property comes with the fundamental right to develop it and make a profit. So, I think any additional costs added to the project adds to her boat, her canoe and her canoe is getting lower and lower into the water.”

“Do they add anything of value to the project? If they don’t then don’t include them,” Soliz stated.

Long-time resident Richard Solack said, “It would be great if we could work on this project. I travel half my workday on the road. Most of my time is spent away from home. Being able to build and work in my home city…would be amazing. Just having that opportunity would be great. So, I recommend approving this project.”

Dale Paris spoke next saying, “I’ve been a life-long resident of Antioch. I’ve been a 50-year construction worker. My father, my brother and I could have worked on this project. But that’s no longer possible. As it stands, I will be able to work on this project with my son and my grandson. It’s been long enough.”

“I’ve had maybe five years total inside the city of Antioch,” he added. “Please, get this through.”

Trustee Mary Rocha spoke next saying, “This is history. Joel Keller, Don Freitas, Manny Soliz. We’ve seen this project for the past 30 years. It seems all these developers have gone on through the process. But for some reason Mrs. Albers is still here. I hope you go forward with this project.”

Johnny Impenko said, “I’m in support of the Albers project. It would be good to work closer to home, to do some coaching and be involved in the community.”

Julian Venetieri, a member of a local union, said, “There are about 15 members of electricians and a few apprentices. We really thank the Albers family for including these workforce development aspects in their project.”

“There’s something different when you have the opportunity to build a project in your own community,” he stated. “They taks a strong sense of pride with this.”

Former Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock spoke next saying, “It hasn’t been 30 years for me. In the last 10 years I’ve become good friends with Lucia and her husband Monte. This project has been near and dear to the council. This is a very good project. It’s intergenerational. Where else in the city of Antioch can you live.”

“We need more projects like this,” she continued. “We’re getting older. We need places we can go live with our families. There’s 49 acres of open space on this project. I don’t know of any other project that has that much open space. Three acres of parks. Tons of trails. This is just something that’s really, really good for Antioch.”

“I know council should support this. I have faith and trust in all of you to do the right things on those,” Ogorchock concluded.

Lucia Albers spoke next saying, “As you know, working with attorneys, consultants, engineers, project managers, all the money I made with the other project is gone.” She went on to reiterate what Keller read earlier and was previously reported. “I had to mortgage my ranch to have to pay for it. So, right now I’m not going to make any money when I sell it. I have over 200 conditions of approval…I am appealing the ones developers have brought to my attention. If you want to see the project like my neighbors want to and I want to, please waive the eight conditions of the 200 conditions so I am able to find a buyer for this project. Right now, I don’t have one. Just the EVA road costs $3 million.”

“They expect me to help pay for a road that was in the General Plan 30 years ago that’s supposed to go all the way to Balfour Road. But it may never go to Balfour Road,” she continued. She was referring to Hillcrest Avenue.

“My sewer, my utilities, everything is coming from Hillcrest. Why should I have to pay for improvements to Sand Creek Road?” Albers asked.

“The park fees are over $400,000. However, I am providing parks, open space and trails,” she added before running out of time limited to five minutes per public speaker.

Resident Velma Wilson spoke next saying, “I do approve this project. But I would also like to hear intentionalities…what are we going to do with our young people…in supporting our schools? Building our schools in real time. Make sure we’re doing everything we can for our students. We need to make sure we’re bringing communities like this where our young people can come to the forefront. Also, our seniors. So, please, let’s not belabor this any longer and approve this project.”

Mary Chapman and Nora VonUbin from An Elderly Wish Foundation spoke next. Champman said, “We’re obviously interested that this is going to be for seniors. This is so wonderful that you have the older people mixed with the younger people.”

“Thank you for the consideration…for the openness,” VonUbin said. “We hope to see this come to fulfillment.”

Debbie Toth, president of Choice in Aging said, “I’m here in support of the project for a myriad of reasons….the 8-80 concept because it’s good for 8-year-olds to 80-year-olds. We seem to cut grandpa and grandma out. This project is visionary. It’s beautiful. It will be an absolute Disneyland in Antioch.”

“Can we do this while Mrs. Albers is still alive? I think 30 years is time served. Wipe those conditions,” she added.

A member of the Board of Directors of Choice in aging who said she is a gerontologist spoke next saying, “This is an amazingly smart project. One of the biggest fears of my clients is aging out of their homes and their communities. It’s a shame. I’m listening here that this has been a 31-year process. As diverse a city as Antioch is, we need to move forward with this project.”

According to City Clerk Melissa Rhodes, 22 more residents who submitted comments but did not wish to speak were in support of the project.

Local affordable housing advocate Andrew Becker was the only person to speak against the project. He said, “I didn’t want to speak as an opponent on the project…but there are some issues. Developers do not set prices on homes. Builders do. Developers create communities. This isn’t putting in a driveway. It’s 300 homes. That’s thousands of individuals. What frustrates me is affordability is spoken a lot, here. What drives the price? The developer may come in and say, ‘this is what it costs to build. Now, how much can we get out of this community. Affordability is what you need in this community.’”

“To have the developer come up and say we shouldn’t be responsible for improving the road that comes up to my property,” he continued. “I do support housing but there has to be an affordability component.”

However, Albers was speaking about the costs of the Emergency Vehicle Access road and helping pay for Hillcrest Avenue beyond her and the neighboring projects.

Council Discussion
During city council discussion of the item, Freitas spoke first saying, “This is a very difficult request to make at the last minute to make eight changes. I am the last person who wants to delay this project. But the requests being made may sound doable. But there’s another side. I’ve spent two hours speaking with Joel Keller and Lucia Albers and said I could not support waiving the conditions.”

“We love Lucia and Monte Albers. But fair is fair,” he continued. “I want to support this project. But I will not vote for the eight exemptions. We have worked with staff for the last 31 years and have had these same exemptions. I think this project should be approved but these exemptions should not.”

However, that’s incorrect. The condition that Albers help pay for improvements to Sand Creek weren’t included until 2019 during the preliminary review of her project by the council.

District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson spoke next saying, “Ms. Lucia, I think I’ve known you longer than I’ve been on this council. I’m in support of the workforce development piece. You know I think what Mrs. Albers is asking for appeals to me. I think her requests are reasonable.”

“Why should she have to pay for Sand Creek Road when her access is Hillcrest. I would approve this project?” she asked

“I think you’re the only female developer since I’ve been on this council who’s come before us,” Wilson added. “Thank you for hanging in there. I’d like to see this project go through and move my mother up there.”

“I think we all know Lucia Albers and her family,” District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha said. “I’m in favor of supporting the project. I have some concerns and questions about the conditions of the project. I’m not sure how we can mitigate that. I think we should move forward with an approval, tonight. But I think our staff should look at that. These are issues that have come to us in the past few days. I don’t want to hold up this project. It seems to me, some of the issues can be met. I’m not sure all of them can.”

Freitas then asked, “If the council sees fit to approve the project as is, can we come back and visit the issues. There’s a master plan for transportation. Is that legally possible?”

“If you entitle the project tonight, then you have a vested project for a developer with rights,” Acting City Attorney Derek Cole said. “So, the answer is, ‘yes’. If we grant some of these conditions, then we have to come up with the money for Aviano. That becomes an obligation of the General Fund. You as a City may end up having to pick up that price.”

“These conditions that we’re requiring are standard…of developers in this City and Contra Costa County,” he continued. “If we do this for this project what does that say for future projects?”

Bernal asked about the curb and gutter on the EVA access road, “Is there a way to eliminate that?”

“That condition of approval was what was shown on the cross-section. So, we didn’t ask them to do it,” a City staff member responded. “But because of the hillside it needs to be done.”

Kevin Van Katwyk, senior civil engineer with Interwest, said, “The applicant proposed the curb and gutter. The EVA is pretty risky, it goes up a hill that’s steep. You might want to control it and you do that with curb and gutter at least on one side.”

“Can you do a concrete V-ditch?” Bernal, a former Antioch City Engineer asked.

“That’s one way to deal with it,” he said.

Jason Vogan of engineering firm Carlson Barbee and Gibson then said, “There are multiple ways to accommodate the drainage. This is a private improvement. So, it will be the responsibility of the homeowners’ association to maintain this.”

“This is the only one, tonight that I think, can be addressed,” Bernal stated.

“Yes. We, as staff can work with the developer,” said Acting Public Works Director Scott Buenting.

“I think that would be a good compromise,” Bernal stated.

“Can we approve this tonight, with this one exemption?” Freitas asked.

“Yes,” Bernal said. Freitas then made a motion to approve, and Rocha seconded it.

“The motion was adopted,” said City Clerk Melissa Rhodes, but did not announce the vote but then announced a recess at 9:25 p.m. However, the council didn’t approve each of the four items on the agenda for the project.

At 9:40 p.m. Bernal called the meeting back to order and asked for direction from the acting city attorney.

“I’ll shake off the rust here. I think we need a vote for each of the four items,” Cole said. “I know there was some discussion on the EVA. That can be addressed in the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map. It gives authority to staff to work with the developer on a cross section. I apologize for not catching this before we broke and doing a mass, one motion.”

“I apologize, also,” Bernal said.

The council then approved each of the four items on 5-0 votes for the Albers Ranch project including, adopting a resolution certifying the Albers Ranch Project Environmental Impact Report; adopting findings of fact and statement of overriding considerations, and adopting the mitigation monitoring and reporting program; adopting a resolution approving a General Plan Amendment to amend the City of Antioch General Plan (GP-19-04); introducing and waiving the first reading of the ordinance rezoning the property to Hillside Planned Development (HPD); and adopt a resolution approving a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, Master Development Plan and a Resource Management Plan, and to direct staff to work with the applicant to work on the EVA.

“Congratulations, Ms. Albers,” Bernal stated.

After the meeting Albers said, “I want to thank everyone from the community for all the support they gave me, who came to the hearing and those who spoke in favor of the project. It was almost unanimous.”

“I don’t feel that I have to improve a road that has no nexus to my project,” she continued. “I would have preferred to have access to Sand Creek Road. It would have been much cheaper than connecting to Hillcrest. But the County Flood Control eminent domained my land and built the berm, blocking the road and utilities between Sand Creek Road and my property. When the City made the agreement about funding the road with Aviano (the development north of Sand Creek Road) I didn’t know about it. By that time, I no longer had access.”

“While I appreciate the council’s approval, and their consideration of working with City staff on lower cost options for the EVA, the remaining conditions are very costly, so unnecessary and make it harder to market the project, decreasing my ability to get a buyer,” Albers added. “Especially, the costs to reimburse Aviano.”

“We look forward to working with City staff to work things out on the EVA,” she concluded.

While the Tentative Map was approved, one thing that wasn’t finalized was a Development Agreement that will extend the approval of the project for up to 10 years, Keller explained later.

“We’ll continue to work with the City on the EVA and on the Development Agreement,” he added.

Following years of delays, unfair treatment by City, County staff

Also, hiring firm for grant writing and legislative advocacy;
Flying Pan-African Flag at City Hall during Black History Month in February;
Rescinding policy for hiring outside legal counsel; and
Funds for Marchetti Park playground replacement.
Will receive Transit-Oriented Communities Policy presentation

By Allen D. Payton

During their next regular meeting tonight, Tuesday, January 28, 2025, the Antioch City Council will consider approving the Albers Ranch Project, more than 30 years after the local, female immigrant developer purchased the land.

They will begin with a Closed Session at 6:00 p.m. to discuss three real estate matters, including leasing space at city owned properties followed by the regular open session at 7:00 p.m.

Albers Ranch New Home Development
On almost 100 acres, the 47.4 acre-project will include the development of 294 non-age restricted single family units, future development of an assisted living facility and neighborhood commercial development, upon issuance of a future Conditional Use Permit, and leave the remaining 49.1 acres of the site as open space. It’s a project that so far no one in the Antioch or environmental communities has opposed. Two local unions spoke in favor of the project during the Nov. 20, 2024 Planning Commission hearing on the project.

Due to the restrictions for the design of the project, including hillside grading, Albers says she was only able to include less than 300 units. However, other developers were able to grade their land and design their projects with fewer restrictions, maximizing the use of their property for more homes per acre.

At that meeting, local developer Lucia Albers, an immigrant from Guatemala, shared her frustrations about the delays through the years from and unequal treatment by City and County staff. (See 18:25 mark of video) That included requiring her to pay for a different biologist than was used by most of the other developers in the Sand Creek area, whose report claimed she had over 10 acres of wetlands on her property and claiming a species that doesn’t exist, making the project unaffordable to build.

The report also required Albers purchase five acres for each acre she planned to develop for mitigation. As a result, the buyers interested in her property at that time withdrew their interest. Now, the requirement is for the purchase for two acres of habitat and wetlands for each acre developed, as required of all the other developments.

“It made my land worthless and delayed the project for five more years,” she stated.

Albers then hired the same biologist as the other developers, whose study showed there are only 2,000 square feet of wetlands, a claim backed up by the U.S. Corps of Engineers.

In addition, Contra Costa County Flood Control forced Albers to change the access road to the project. It was supposed to be directly connected to Sand Creek Road at Rigolato Drive where a four-way signalized intersection is located. While the conditions of approval require her to still help pay for the signals, there, the project must now connect off of Hillcrest Avenue through the neighboring Creekside Vineyards housing development. That’s due to Flood Control eminent domaining Albers’ land and building a berm, where the original access road was to be built, for a detention basin north of the property.

Flood Control low-balled the offer for her land at about 10 cents on the dollar for what Albers paid forcing her to take them to court. The settlement paid her a fairer price per acre and required Flood Control to cooperate with her on the access road. But they went ahead and built the berm blocking her access road.

Yet, Albers is required to pay for both the signalized intersection which will not benefit her project as well as a portion of the cost of the Hillcrest Avenue extension south of Sand Creek Road which will provide access to her project.

The over 200 conditions of approval also require her to pay for the sewer line from Sand Creek Road. But the Planning Commission waived that if her project doesn’t use it. The commissioners also removed the requirement for the project to include curb, gutter and sidewalk on both sides of the Emergency Vehicle Access road off of Deer Valley Road, just requiring her to provide it on one side. Yet, Albers argues that it will cost over $1 million and is not necessary because it will be maintained by the CCR’s of the homeowners’ association for the project, not the City. “And it may never be used,” she added.

The Planning Commission, with one vacancy and one member absent, voted 5-0 to approve the project with the various conditions. Some of them are still too expensive, reducing the value of her land, Albers claims. She will be asking for the council members to remove them from the conditions of the project before voting to approve.

Albers, who purchased the property in 1994 and whose husband Monte passed away last year, previously exclaimed to this reporter, “We started this when I was a young woman! Finally, I’ll have a chance to see it approved. We’ve had multiple interested buyers in the past, but the delays and increased costs proposed by City staff caused them to pull back their offers.”

Albers was referring to the fact that she is not the home builder to which the land will be sold, once she can again find another who will purchase it.

After 30 years, City staff is willing to give Albers two five-year extensions to her development agreement, which she views as positive. Because without them the builder who buys her land would have to start construction within two years. However, City staff want to charge her $630,000. Yet, she claims none of the development agreements for the neighboring projects east of Deer Valley Road were required to pay monetary compensation to the city for their development agreements, which allow for extensions.

Even after the approvals, when she sells the land, Albers says she will only be able to recuperate all the costs that were put into it.

Transit-Oriented Communities Policy Presentation
At the beginning of the regular meeting, the city council will be given a presentation on Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). TOCs feature housing and business development that is near to transportation, putting public transit in reach for more people and improving the quality of life in the Bay Area.

It’s part of the Advance Plan Bay Area 2050 implementation which has Four Goals:
• Increase affordable housing supply in transit areas;
• Increase density for commercial office development;
• Prioritize transit and active transportation near stations; and
• Create equitable transit-oriented communities.

The TOC Policy was adopted by the MTC Board in September 2022 and applies to areas within a half-mile of Regional Rail transit stops and stations, such as BART stations, as is located in Antioch and ferries, as planned for the City’s waterfront.

Approving the policy to fulfill the goals expands eligibility for some MTC discretionary funding for the City and opens consideration for future One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) funding revisions and investments, the presentation explains. So far, across the three OBAG rounds, Antioch has received $4,946,000 in funds. Applications for OBAG Round 4 were due in November and Antioch requested a total of $850,000.

In order to comply, the City of Antioch must do the following:
• Density – Increasing residential and commercial densities around station areas;
• Housing – Adopting housing policies from the 3Ps framework (production, preservation and protection);
• Parking – Adjusting minimum and maximum parking ratios as well as transportation demand management policies; and
• Transit Station Access & Circulation – Planning for station access that includes active transportation uses and mobility hub infrastructure.

According to the MTC, Mobility Hubs offer access to many different ways of getting around. MTC coordinates, funds and provides technical assistance for new Mobility Hubs to support first and last mile connections through access to multiple travel options.

Mobility hubs are places in a community that bring together public transit, bike share, car share and other ways for people to get where they want to go without a private vehicle.

Built around frequent and high-capacity transit, mobility hubs offer a safe, comfortable, convenient and accessible space to seamlessly transfer from one type of transportation to another.

Mobility hubs can be located where transit services already come together, or in communities and locations where transportation is needed the most. MTC has prioritized pilot investments for regionally significant mobility hubs.

Once awarded, City Council must adopt a Resolution of Local Support to receive the grant funds and develop a work plan to:
▪ Update the Hillcrest Station Area Specific Plan to comply with the TOC policies
▪ Identify and plan to adopt feasible affordable housing policies
▪ Eliminate parking minimums and adopt parking maximums
▪ Complete any outstanding station access and circulation requirements

Consent Calendar
Under the Consent Calendar, the council will consider amending the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Capital Improvement and Operating Budget in the amount of $325,000 from the Park-In-Lieu Fund for the playground replacement purchase at Marchetti Park.

Flying Pan-African Flag for Black History Month
The council will also consider under the Consent Calendar voting on flying the Pan-African Flag at City Hall throughout the month of February 2025 in recognition of Black History Month in the City of Antioch.

Hiring Grant Writing and Legislative Advocacy Firm
Also, under the Consent Calendar, the council will vote on hiring Townsend Public Affairs for $12,500 per month in an Amount Not to Exceed $62,500 for a term ending June 30, 2025, for Grant Writing & Management and Legislative Advocacy Services. In addition, in the event both parties agree to extend the services, the additional services would be provided through June 30, 2027, and up to $300,000, and will be included for consideration in the upcoming two-year budget cycle.

Rescinding Policy for Hiring Outside Legal Counsel
Under agenda Item 8, the council will consider rescinding the 2021 council resolution which consolidated the hiring of all outside legal counsel in the City Attorneys Office. According to the city staff report for the item, “The rescission of Resolution No. 2021/26 will result in a decentralized approach to the budgeting and payment of legal services. Under the current policy, all legal service costs are managed within the City Attorney’s Office General Fund budget. Rescinding the resolution will shift the responsibility for budgeting, processing, and evaluating legal services invoices to individual departments.” In addition, “By rescinding this resolution, the City will no longer have a formal policy governing the selection, approval and payment process for legal services beyond the general provisions of the Antioch Municipal Code.”

Meeting Details
The council meeting will be held in the Council Chambers inside City Hall at 200 H Street in historic, downtown Rivertown. The meeting can also be viewed via livestream on the City’s website at https://www.antiochca.gov/government/city-council-meetings/live/ or on Comcast Cable channel 24 or AT&T U-verse channel 99. See the entire meeting agenda at www.antiochca.gov/fc/government/agendas/CityCouncil/2025/agendas/012825/012825.pdf.

Discusses final 6 months of 2-year budget ending this June

Agrees to eliminate council slush funds of $20K each

Without new source of funding Crisis Response Team to end Oct. 31

By Allen D. Payton

Without any public comments, Antioch City Finance Director Dawn Merchant delved right into her report to the Antioch City Council during their meeting on the budget study session held Monday, January 27, 2025. She called it, “A high-level overview for closing the books for 2024-25.” The council learned Opportunity Village, referred to as the homeless hotel on E. 18th Street will run out of funds to operate as of April 30th, as will the City’s crisis response team as of Oct. 31st and chose to eliminate the $20,000 per member slush fund the previous council majority approved.

“The numbers presented this evening are subject to change,” she added. “Department heads are already developing their budgets for Fiscal Years 2025-27” two-year budget which begins July 1, 2025.

It was the first meeting of the entire five-member council since the oath of office meeting on Dec. 10th.

Following her presentation, which was written in the staff report for the agenda, the council asked a variety of questions. Mayor Ron Bernal chose to review the staff report page by page.

Reserve Funds, Make Budget Easier to Understand

“This is a preview of future attractions, so to speak,” District 3 Councilman Don Freitas said. He then asked about the City’s two reserve funds saying “Are they the same? Why aren’t they combined?”

“Because when this was established in 2018, we had an accumulation of fund balance from staff vacancies. City Council wanted to set aside the funds in a separate funds so it didn’t appear we had all these funds to spend on ongoing expenditures…and so we would have a safety net,” Merchant said.

“The public and members of the council get very confused with the transfers-in and transfers-out,” the councilman said. “I think we should combine the reserve funds. I want someone in high school to be able to look at the budget and understand it.”

“I would like to look at possibly establishing a policy on how set-aside funds can be utilized in the future,” Bernal added.

“I agree,” Freitas responded. He also wanted to see a reserve in the CIP (Capital Improvement Program) budget.

“Making this as easy as possible for folks to understand,” Bernal stated about his desires for the budget document.

Investment Funds and Policies

Freitas then asked about the investment policies and “million decreases in building activities. That’s a red flag to me.”

“The County will have to re-examine the Urban Limit Line,” he continued. “There might be an interest in the County in limiting more growth in the cities. That could have a dramatic impact.”

“If we had all those vacant positions filled, would we have any money in the budget?” Freitas then asked. Merchant laughed. “There’s a lot of income there. City Council needs to take a realistic view…not have positions approved that have not been filled for two or three years.”

“We’re looking at all of that…the length they’ve been vacant and why,” Merchant responded.

“On that note with the vacancies what’s the timeline to fill those vacancies? One year or two years?” asked District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha.

“Instead of guessing we can get those actuals,” Merchant said. “The department heads are looking at that and preparing it. So, we can’t answer that, tonight.”

Asking about the investment funds, District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson asked if the investments can be changed mid-year.

“City investments are governed by the government code. Funds are supposed to be safe guarded,” Merchant stated. “The City is on a two-to-three-year benchmark. If we have excess funds…we will transfer those funds to the custodian…then to PFM” who handles the City’s investments.”

“We can go out to another investment firm, but they would be governed by the same code,” Merchant responded.

“Over a 20-year term? I’ll be making a recommendation,” Freitas said.

“It seems like our investments went from $1.1 to $2.7 million last year,” Bernal pointed out.

“The interest rates were really high for a while,” Merchant stated.

“It would probably be good to come back with a single study and go over all of how that works,” Bernal said.

Freitas suggested top staff have a meeting on a quarterly basis, to review the City’s investments.

Request Corrected Budget Figures

“We have a $95 million base not a $100 million base when we take out all the ARPA money,” Bernal stated.

“When the budget comes back and we’re going into ’26 an ’27 the budget will show what we’re expecting then…and have the one-time funds broken out,” Merchant explained.

“I think what we’re talking about is transparency, showing $95 million instead of $100 million,” Rocha stated.

Transfers In

Freitas asked about the 10% for Transfers In saying, “Is that normal?”

“It was a little bit higher in 2024-25 because of the ARPA funds and the Bicycle Garden,” Merchant shared.

Sales Tax Versus Property Tax Amounts

“I think it would be interesting…to understand the various categories of sales tax,” Freitas said. “It’s a lump sum and it doesn’t give us the ability to make any policy decisions going forward.”

“If property taxes are the largest revenue, what are we doing as a City to improve property values?” he asked.

However, Sales Tax including the City’s 1% sales tax generates 49% of taxes to the General Fund, while Property Tax generates 36% of taxes.

Wilson spoke of the Transient Occupation Tax, the 10% tax on hotel and motel bookings. “Not all our operators pay when they’re supposed to,” she stated. “I think that’s something council should take a serious look at.”

Freitas asked about when Measure W’s one-cent sales tax ends. “20 years…in 2037,” Merchant said.

“It was going to be 80-10-10 but we had to fight to get 20 for youth,” Wilson said about the split of the use of revenue from Measure W.

“Under investment income and rentals…do you have an idea what that’s going to look like over the next several years,” Bernal asked.

“I’m going to look at that,” Merchant responded.

Legal Costs Questioned

Referring to the $1.3M increase in outside legal costs for several on-going litigations mentioned in the staff report, Freitas requested, “I’d like to know how much we’ve spent last year and this year on outside legal counsel and per firm.”

City Hall & Marina Parking Lots

Regarding City Hall, “is the parking lot sinking and are the trees being removed?” Freitas asked. “If there’s a problem with the parking lot, which brings in the issue of the marina parking lot.”

“Yes, the marina parking lot does move,” Acting Public Works Director Scott Buenting said. “It’s because of the underlying issue of the Bay mud. We try to eliminate the ponding as much as possible.”

“The eucalyptus trees are being removed. We are installing some EV charging stations,” he added. “It’s not moving like an earthquake. It’s moving slowly.”

“If there was an earthquake, I guess it’s called liquefaction. What would be the worst-case scenario?” Freitas asked.

“There’d be no liquefaction there, as the parking lot is on bay mud,” Buenting responded.

Lone Tree Golf Course Funds

Regarding questions on the funds for the Lone Tree Golf Course, Merchant said, “The golf course agreement that’s been in place for several years, now, that they pay us about $20,000 per year and they pay for the rest.”

Wilson said, “Mr. Mayor I want to remind you that you and I sit on the golf course committee.”

On the Transfer Out Bernal said, “these seem to be increasing each year.”

Unfunded Liabilities

About “unfunded liabilities of $166 million that seems like a lot of money” the mayor stated.

“So, the total costs that we’re paying toward this black hole is about $20 million per year?” he asked. “It’s more than 20% of our revenues. So, it’s a huge cost to the citizens of Antioch.”

“That’s just in the General Fund. There’s also an amount in the Water Fund,” Merchant stated. “They take our overall liability and subtract the value of assets”

“This is $167 million exposure…I think we need to come back and revisit this. It’s like a credit card and only paying interest,” Freitas stated.

“We are paying part of the unfunded liability,” Merchant said.

“I think we should be paying it,” Freitas responded.

“Then you’d have to decide what you don’t want to pay for in the General Fund,” Merchant responded.

Crisis Response Team May End Oct. 31

“Under ARPA…we spent $5.7 million…for the crisis response team,” Freitas pointed out. “This was ARPA money…one-time money. Has there been any discussion if this is going to continue how we’re going to come up with $6 millon?”

“No. Not at the council level,” Merchant said.

“That’s not true. It has always been stated it won’t be covered by the General Fund because it’s not sustainable,” District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker stated. “That’s why we need to start looking at state and federal funds.”

“As for the…crisis response team and Mayor’s Apprenticeship Program, there are grant funds out there…to keep funding those programs,” she added.

“So, by Oct. 31…is the crisis response team ending?” Freitas asked.

“In our discussions with the county are you looking at a strategy…and look at collaborating with the County and our neighboring cities?” Rocha asked.

“This has helped…reduce police calls for service,” Torres-Walker argued.

“I think having a crisis response team is good,” Freitas stated. “It’s the ability to finance it.”

“Thank you for acknowledging the work that does need to happen,” said Public Safety and Community Resources Department Director Tasha Johnson. “There are some possible grant funding opportunities. We do have some funds in our budget for a grant writer.”

“The community response team has done tremendous work in the community,” she continued. “They help with our unhoused residents. We are looking to sustain that with outside funding.”

Opportunity Village Homeless Hotel to Run Out of Funds April 30

“With Opportunity Village to end April 30th, this year…we are working with the County to set up that program. The state funding can only be used for encampment residents. We’ve identified the one of Devpar Court. It’s down in a ravine. You can’t really see it.”

In response to a question from Freitas about the funds and residents at Opportunity Village, the homeless hotel on E. 18th Street, Johnson responded, “For now, the encampment resolution funds will shift the focus to those residents.”

“We have a meeting with Felton to discuss the sustainability of the program,” she added in response to a question about the operator and what the City will do for the residents there.

“So, April 2025, we will no longer be operating Opportunity Village?” Freitas asked.

“Correct,” Johnson responded.

CalVIP Grant funds

Bernal asked her to speak about the CalVIP grant.

“We received approximately $1.8 million to reduce gun violence…in our community,” Johnson stated. “With that grant we were able to identify individuals who perpetrate gun violence. There are currently 13 fellows in the program. We offer all kinds of services to stabilize their lives. The operator is One Day At a Time. This program is roughly $800,000 per year. So, the $1.8 million is for two years.”

“This program is impactful. But we’re looking to grow it…for two years,” she added.

“When we first applied it was a 100% match,” from the City budget. “But this time around there is no match. So, that’s hot off the press,” Johnson.

Freitas asked for more details about the program at a future council meeting.

“A lot of this work is new. I would appreciate the opportunity to present,” she added.

“These are actually three-year cycles,” Torres-Walker shared. “The application was done jointly with the police department. Antioch could have gotten more than $1.8 million. But we need a pilot. This next cohort I’m looking to get more. The City of Richmond has been doing this for 20 years and she got $6 million.”

She also spoke of wanting to “increase the public-private partnership.”

“What I’m looking at are what are the measurable goals…when the presentation comes back,” Freitas requested.

“We’ll be asking for the council to continue the program,” City Manager Bessie Scott.

Council Budget – Agree to Eliminate $20K Slush Fund for Each Member

Under the city council budget, Freitas said, “I’m opposed to each city council member having $20,000.”

“I never spent any of the money anyways,” said Torres-Walker. “I actually raised more money in my district that exceeds this amount annually.”

Both Bernal and Rocha agreed.

“I’d rather see those funds go toward…the needs of our community,” the District 2 Councilman said.

“Each council member should have a meeting in their district. I think its appropriate on the controversial issues, especially,” Freitas said. “I think each council member can come to the council and say, ‘I want to have a meeting in my district’ and request the funds.”

“You can do a community meeting in your district without using any of these funds,” Torres-Walker stated.

“That’s where we disagree,” Freitas responded.

“On the Mayor’s Apprenticeship Program, I’d like to rename that the Antioch Apprenticeship Program or Director Johnson can come up with a catchy name,” Bernal stated.

Freitas asked about a few items in Attachment A, the General Fund Revenue Summary.

Bernal then asked about the programs based on ARPA funds. “That will give us a lot of work to do,” he stated.

Water Park Repair Funds

Wilson asked about the Water Park and the repairs needed there.

“The city council did allocate money for those repairs,” Merchant responded.

Parks & Recreation Department Director Brad Helfenberger shared, “There was an allocation of approximately $1.7 million. We are in the process of allocating that. The biggest project…will be resurfacing two pools and the deck. That will use $1 million.”

Capital Improvement Program Funds

“I know the CIP comes later in the program, but it would be good to bring it sooner, this year,” Bernal stated.

“I think we need to take a very close look at what’s in the CIP and if it’s not going to be built…it gets deleted,” Freitas requested. “I think we should deal with reality than have wish lists.”

Staff Vacancies

Bernal and Rocha then requested more details on the vacant positions and how many the city staff expects to fill and by when.

“If it’s realistic that only 20 to 25 officers and support staff can be hired, I don’t know why we would include in the budget all the vacant positions,” Freitas stated. “I think that will free up some of the money. I don’t think it’s responsible to continue allocating funds when we know realistically, we will never fill those positions in that year.”

“Agreed,” Merchant responded. “We try to do that in the budget.”

“It would be helpful to know how many police officers go out on disability,” Freitas requested.

“I’d like to know and hear about a list of infrastructure projects we can have,” Wilson requested.

Next Budget Workshop

It was agreed that the city council’s next budget session will be held on Tuesday, March 4.

Torres-Walker was concerned about when the meetings would start, “because some of us work full time” she stated.

“With everybody’s schedule, it’s hard to coordinate,” Scott responded.

“That means for the rest of the departments we’re going to have to hustle through the rest of them,” Bernal said about the schedule.

“Thank you for your work tonight and helping us move forward being productive,” he then said to city staff.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m.

For Fiscal Years 2025-27

By Allen D. Payton

On Monday, Jan. 27, the Antioch City Council will hold a special meeting for a Budget Session to discuss development of the Fiscal Year 2025-27 budget. They will hear from the city manager and staff then provide feedback and direction.

According to the City staff report on the item, “The purpose of this discussion is to understand where we are in closing out the current budget cycle for FY25 and does not include policy discussions as we embark on the next two-year budget cycle which will revise the FY25 budget and adopt the FY26 and FY27 budgets. As a kickoff to this budget cycle, a preliminary review of the projected revised FY25 General Fund budget is being provided this evening as well as items to consider as we move forward building the proposed budgets for the next two fiscal years.”

As previously reported last October, the City is facing double-digit deficits for each of the next three fiscal years. According to the General Fund Projections for 2023-2028 presented to the city council on June 11, 2024, the General Fund was projected to run the following deficits: $12,995,259 in FY 2025-26; $13,561,074 in FY 2026-27; and $14,855,649 in FY 2027-28.

The first two are expected to be covered by transfers from the Budget Stabilization Fund, but it will only cover $1,253,902 in the third year of what could be Hernandez-Thorpe’s second term as mayor if he’s re-elected because that Fund will be depleted in FY 2028. That would result in a projected net deficit for the City of $13,601,748 by June 30, 2028, which would be covered by the General Fund reserve leaving it with an Ending Balance of just $17.4 million or 17.06% in reserves versus over 31% and 32% for the previous fiscal years.

The City staff report also shares, “As a refresher for the public and the governing body, the General Fund is the main operating fund of the City and accounts for the majority of essential services provided, other than water. The General Fund is divided into separate cost centers depending on the purpose served which are referred to as departments with sub-groupings of divisions within each department. The departments supported by the General Fund are:
• Legislative & Administrative (City Council, City Clerk, City Attorney, Human Resources, City Manager, Economic Development)
• Finance
• Non-departmental (this category is for general revenues to be spent on City services and accounts for expenses not specific to a department or division)
• Public Works (other than water/sewer)
• Police (includes Animal Shelter subsidy)
• Community Development
• Public Safety and Community Resources (other than Community Development Block Grant, Housing Successor and Environmental Services which are accounted for in individual Special Revenue Funds)
• Recreation Services (subsidy to Recreation Fund)

“While there are fees, charges and permits that fund a portion of departments directly within the General Fund, the majority of revenues that the General Fund receives are general purpose and offset the remaining cost of operations not covered by targeted revenues. These general revenues include property taxes, sales taxes, business license taxes and franchise fees.

“A budget should be balanced, meaning that the expenditures in any given fiscal year should not exceed revenues. In 2018, the City established a Budget Stabilization Fund When established, the purpose of this fund was to provide a means of handling unexpected General Fund budget variances, unanticipated projects and/or expenses, and unfunded liabilities.”

The staff report further includes the following:

Reserve Policy

“The City has an adopted reserve policy that the General Fund unassigned (not committed for other purposes) fund balance will be a minimum of 20% of General Fund operating revenues. The percentage for the revised fiscal year 2025 budget is shown at the bottom of Chart A.

General Fund Budget Summary

“Chart A provides revised FY25 General Fund budget figures as compared to the current udget based on projections and estimates by departments. The numbers may change as we proceed through this budget process. Chart B and B1 immediately following breaks down the General Fund projected FY25 revenues by category and Charts C, C1 and C2 outline the expenditures by department and category.

“The budget in Chart A reflects three commitments of fund balance:

1. Compensated absences – The purpose of this reserve is to fund the City’s mandated liability for unused vacation and/or vested sick leave benefits paid upon employee separation. The reserve level is set at 5% of the total compensated
   absences liability for General Fund employees. It was established to meet accounting best practices.
2. Litigation Reserve – The purpose of this reserve is to ensure the General Fund has money on hand for unanticipated litigation and other insurance deductible costs not covered by the City insurance. The reserve level is set at ten times the City’s self-insured liability retention, which is $50,000, representing a $500,000 reserve.
3. Community Development fees – This represents the accumulation of General Plan maintenance fees and Technology fees collected which can only be spent for these purposes. It is adjusted annually for fees collected and/or spent.

“The deficit of $5,358,842 listed above after the Budget Stabilization transfer is due to FY24 encumbrances (purchase orders) and project budgets that were unspent and rolled over and budgeted into FY25 for spending. The true deficit is anticipated to be $1,418,515, in the Budget Stabilization Transfer row above, after accounting for the budget rollover.

“The transfer from the Budget Stabilization Fund is being reduced $3,198,628 from the budget of $4,617,143 due to the inflow of ARPA funds in the current fiscal year reducing the need from the Budget Stabilization Fund to balance the budget.

“The General Fund will meet the reserve unassigned fund balance policy in FY25…projected overall ending General Fund balance of $37,899,927. The projected balance of the Budget Stabilization Fund at June 30, 2025 is $38,512,955.

“It is important to note that some one-time monies are included in Chart A in the Transfers In and Revenue from Other Agencies rows…which will leave a lower starting base to evaluate FY26 and FY27 revenues.”

For more details from the staff report on the budget see the meeting agenda.

Meeting Details

The council meeting begins at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers inside City Hall at 200 H Street in historic, downtown Rivertown. The meeting can also be viewed via livestream on the City’s website.

Not intended to comply with nor required by USDOJ settlement agreement

By Allen D. Payton

Antioch City Manager Bessie Scott clarified the reason the consulting firm of former Interim Antioch Police Chief Brian Addington and former Interim Captain Patrick Wenz, WBA Consulting and Investigations, was hired by the City on a 3-0 vote of the city council on Tuesday, Jan. 14, 2025. The City staff report for item #10 on the council meeting agenda for that night’s meeting was misinterpreted as it included information about the City’s settlement agreement with the U.S Department of Justice and this reporter and others believed the contract was to fulfill one of the requirements.

The City staff report read, “The City seeks the services of a qualified consultant team that can provide support, guidance, and advice in several areas, which will supplement and enhance the Antioch Police Department’s efficiency and effectiveness. The City requires assistance with overall project management for Police Department operations and administration, policy support, and special project implementation for not only day to day operations, but also with compliance efforts identified in the Department of Justice (‘DOJ’) settlement agreement with the Antioch Police Department and City of Antioch dated January 2, 2025. (See related article)

“The City needs its own expert who is familiar with law enforcement in California and keenly knowledgeable of police practices in the region, specifically the Antioch Police Department. The City needs a consultant that can step into the position with little to no time for learning the issues that have plagued the department, the current interventions in place to improve effectiveness, public trust, and morale, and ensure constitutional policing in Antioch, as well as have the ability to provide guidance immediately.

“The services provided by WBA Consulting (‘WBA’) will be provided by two former Antioch Police Department personnel who have been working within the department as Interim Chief and Interim Captain for the majority of the 2024 year. The team will continue to provide executive police management support and consultation to the Acting Chief and City Manager as it relates to mandatory compliance with relevant federal and state laws, regulations, and rules. The City is embarking on a five-year stipulated settlement agreement with the DOJ and has an ongoing investigation with the California Department of Justice (‘CalDOJ’).

“The support needed for these specific challenges and requirements can only be met by former Interim Chief Addington and his team as they have been deeply involved in several of these investigations and initiatives, and there is absolutely no bandwidth for those communications to continue seamlessly without the WBA team. “Because of the existing support and knowledge that can only be provided by WBA, the City Manager requests for the City Council to approve the contract under sole source provisions of the Antioch Municipal Code section 3-4.12 (B).”

In addition, information in the settlement agreement added to the misunderstanding. As was previously reported, the agreement requires several items and processes including, “within 90 days of the Effective Date, the City, the APD, and the United States will identify and mutually agree on a Consultant who is a law enforcement expert with a proven track record in civil rights and law enforcement compliance, as well as state of California law enforcement experience and knowledge of California compliance requirements. The Consultant shall serve as the single point of contact with the United States and be retained by the APD at the City’s expense.” The “annual cost of the consulting engagement shall not exceed $250,000 per year.” It was believed that WBA was the aforementioned consultant.

This reporter misinterpreted the description and information and reported the contract with WBA was to fulfill the settlement agreement with the U.S. DOJ. (See related articles here and here) My apologies.

To clarify matters, Scott wrote the following on Tuesday, January 21, 2025: “The City of Antioch is issuing this statement in response to recent incorrect impressions surrounding who will be the monitoring consultant for the city. It appears that several members of the community mistakenly believe that the WBA Consulting and Investigations LLC consulting agreement, discussed at the January 14th, 2025, City of Antioch Council Meeting, is intended to fulfill the monitoring services referenced within the terms of the Memorandum of Agreement of the City of Antioch’s Settlement Agreement with the United States Department of Justice signed earlier this month.

“We want to clarify that Brian Addington’s consulting firm, WBA Consulting and Investigations LLC, is not performing the services referenced by Section 3 of the Memorandum of Agreement between the City of Antioch and the United States Department of Justice. The consultant for the Memorandum of Agreement has not yet been selected.

The City will prepare a Request for Qualifications for this matter and work with the United States Department of Justice to identify a consultant who is a law enforcement expert with a proven track record in civil rights and law enforcement compliance, as well as state of California law enforcement experience and knowledge of California compliance requirements.

“The consultant will review and update the Antioch Police Department’s policies, procedures and training including non-discriminatory policing, use of force, hiring and promotions, investigations of misconduct, discipline, community policing, language access, and other topics. The consultant will also provide an in-person report to the Antioch City Council at regularly scheduled City Council meetings at least once every 180 days.”

Section 3 of DOJ Settlement Agreement

The first part of Section 3 of the settlement agreement with the USDOJ reads as follows:

“III. REQUIREMENTS
A. Consultant: Within 90 days of the Effective Date, the City, the APD, and the United States will identify and mutually agree on a Consultant who is a law enforcement expert with a proven track record in civil rights and law enforcement compliance, as well as state of California law enforcement experience and knowledge of California compliance requirements. The Consultant shall serve as the single point of contact with the United States and be retained by the APD at the City’s expense. The total annual cost of the consulting engagement shall not exceed $250,000 per year. The Consultant will be responsible for the following functions, among others set forth in this Agreement:

1. providing technical assistance and recommendations to the Chief of Police and APD, the City Manager, the City Attorney, and APOC on implementation of this Agreement;
2. developing an implementation schedule;
3. reviewing and reporting on the APD’s progress in meeting the terms of this Agreement to the United States;
4. coordinating compliance and implementation activities;
5. facilitating access by the United States to APD personnel, data, documents and materials;
6. maintaining data, documents, and records, as provided for in this Agreement;
7. assigning implementation and compliance-related tasks to APD personnel, as directed by the Police Chief and/or his/her designee;
8. providing an in-person report to the Antioch City Council at regularly scheduled City Council meetings at least once every 180 days; and
9. assisting with all other aspects of compliance with this Agreement.”

Read additional details from the 25-page settlement agreement.

Agreement with WBA Not Required by DOJ Settlement Agreement

As previously reported, the amount of the agreement with Addington’s firm is not to exceed $225,000 through June 30, 2025, with a one-time extension for an additional six months for the same terms.

When asked to further clarify if the contract with his firm is one of the requirements in the US DOJ settlement agreement Addington said, “No.” Asked if his agreement is outside of the purview of the settlement agreement he responed, “Yes.”

“What you’ll see, eventually, is an RFQ for firms wanting to be the monitoring consultant. My firm will not be doing that at all,” Addington stated.

“The MOA spells out what the requirements are for the monitor,” he added.

Scott said, “There’s currently not enough staffing in the police department. We will have new, full-time employees fulfilling the settlement agreement.”

“We’re grateful that Brian Addington is able to help the City in working with the monitor and setting up the new Standards and Compliance Bureau which is required by the terms of the DOJ settlement agreement,” the city manager added.

About WBA

According to his bio on the company’s website, “William ‘Brian’ Addington founded WBA Consulting and Investigations LLC after serving over 30 years in law enforcement. He has served in a range of executive and command positions, including 10 years as police chief. His expertise covers the full range of policing disciplines based on his experiences in a law enforcement agency in California.

“Brian provides expert advice on best practices in policing, leadership development, organizational assessments, training, independent investigations, and community engagement and media relations.

“Brian has also served as an advisor and consultant to various law enforcement agencies and executives in developing strategies and best practices to address the ever-changing demands placed on law enforcement professionals.”

About Patrick Wentz

In addition to his service with the Antioch PD, Wentz is a former Pittsburg Police Captain with 26 years of service before retiring in November 2023. According to a post on the Pittsburg PD Facebook page, Wentz “has held various crucial roles, demonstrating his commitment to excellence. From his early days as a Patrol Officer, Field Training Officer, and tactical team member to his role as a Lead Homicide Detective in the Investigations Division, Captain Wentz has consistently displayed professionalism and a relentless pursuit of justice.

His ascent through the ranks, from Sergeant to Lieutenant and ultimately to Captain in 2017, reflects not only his dedication to personal growth, but also his commitment to training and mentoring the next generation of law enforcement professionals. Captain Wentz’s influence extends across every unit within our department, and his leadership and mentoring abilities have been instrumental in shaping the future of our force.

Beyond his notable career achievements, Captain Wentz is a proud graduate of the POST Sherman Block Supervisory Leadership Institute (SLI) and POST Command College. His educational pursuits, coupled with his Bachelor of Arts degree in Criminal Justice Management, exemplify his commitment to continuous learning and professional development.”

He completed his time with the Antioch Police Department on Wednesday, December 18, 2024. (See related article)

Discuss 10% annual water rate increases, set public hearing for March 11

“This is kind of a shock for people, 50% over five years” – District 3 Councilman Don Freitas.

Both councilwomen absent for first meeting of the year

By Allen D. Payton

During the first Antioch City Council meeting of the new year, on Tuesday, January 14, 2025, the new mayor and two members discussed and approved a variety of matters without the input or votes of both councilwomen who did not attend. Those included an agreement with former Interim Chief Brian Addington’s consulting firm for services to the police department and fees for concealed carry weapons. The council also heard a presentation on the process for recruiting a new, permanent police chief and another from the Parks and Recreation Department entitled, “What a Year It’s Been – Celebrating Our Year 2024.”

According to City Manager Bessie Scott, District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker was sick and District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson was in Washington D.C. for a conference.

Approves Agreement with Addington’s Consulting Firm for Police Department

After just completing his time as Antioch’s interim police chief last Friday, Jan. 10, 2025, Brian Addington’s company, WBA Consulting was hired as the consultant to the police department to comply with the City’s recent agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice.

As previously reported, the council was asked to hire a “consultant team that can provide support, guidance, and advice in several areas, which will supplement and enhance the Antioch Police Department’s efficiency and effectiveness. The City requires assistance with overall project management for Police Department operations and administration, policy support, and special project implementation for not only day-to-day operations, but also with compliance efforts identified in the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) settlement agreement with the Antioch Police Department and City of Antioch dated January 2, 2025.” (See related article)

WBA Consulting was mentioned as part of his background in an introductory article about Addington when he was hired as interim police chief last February.

Other than one question from District 3 Councilman Don Freitas about the items in the agreement lined through that were eliminated from the final version, without discussion, the council approved the agreement 3-0, with Councilwomen Tamisha Torres-Walker and Monica Wilson absent.

Approves CCW Permit Fees

Under agenda item 6, according to Antioch Police Captain Desmond Bitner, who provided the City staff report to the council about setting fees for handling concealed carry weapons (CCW) permits, the majority of law enforcement agencies in California use software to expedite the process. As of January, under SB2 cities can increase fees. Permits have to be renewed every two years.

“These are basic numbers we’ve assessed and consulted other agencies,” Bittner We’re not making any money on this. We’re just breaking even to cover our costs.”

Only two members of the public spoke on the item, but neither chose to serve as the proponent or opponent for the public hearing which would have afforded them 10 minutes to speak.

“I was not aware what’s really going on,” said a woman who claimed to be a local leader for Gun Owners of America. “I get a little emotional when it comes to my right to carry. I grew up in this town. I left…then I came back. I feel incredibly unsafe in this town.”

“It’s cheaper for me to fly to Texas…to get the training,” she continued. “To hear the fees for me to exercise my constitutional right to carry…is appalling.”

“Police told me the applications are stacked so high, don’t even bother,” she added. “I just want actions, and I want answers. I shouldn’t have to wait a year-and-a-half.”

Resident Greg Farina who identified himself as the president of the Contra Costa Chapter of the California Rifle and Pistol Association said, “I’m very happy the City of Antioch is going through this. I just got my letter from Contra Costa County. It took me 15 months.”

“Yes, it’s expensive. I’m concerned about lower income folks. I will help you do anything and help sell what you’re doing,” he added.

Freitas asked Bittner, “do we actively have applications for the City of Antioch, now?”

“As far as I know, no,” the captain responded. “We averaged about five applications per year. The sheriff’s department processed for us on average 67 per year. We can get the knocked out in 90 days. If the applicant is being diligent in getting things done, we’ll be right there with them.”

“This will not impact the General Fund?” District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha asked. Mayor Ron Bernal responded, “No.”

“We respect the citizens right to carry,” Bittner added.

The council approved the item on a 3-0 vote.

Review Water Rates Study Including 10% per Year Increases & Set Public Hearing

Under Item 7 the council adopted a resolution to set a hearing for March 11th on water rate increases. City staff presented a Water Rates Study showing Antioch has the lowest single family monthly water bills of neighboring cities and a proposed increase of 10% per year on average. The City’s ratepayers get to provide their opinion to the council.

On Nov. 12, 2025, the previous council failed to approve the rate increases on a vote 2-1-1 with Councilwomen Lori Ogorchock and Monica Wilson voting yes, then-Mayor Lamar Hernandez-Thorpe voting no, Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker voting to abstain and then-Councilman Mike Barbanica absent. (See Item 8 of the Meeting Minutes)

“If the council should accept these, is the funding sufficient to pay our bills on an annual basis?” Freitas asked.

“Yes,” Tom Pavletic of Pavletic Consulting responded.

The Water Use chart for Calendar Years 2023-29 shows a one percent increase in projected water use for Fiscal Year 2024 but a one percent decrease in FY2025-27 and a two percent decrease in FY2028 and 2029.
“I don’t understand for three consecutive years you’re showing a decrease,” Freitas stated.

“We put 100 new accounts per year in this model. But it’s a matter of conservation. In the past 15 years your single-family user class has reduced 15%,” the consultant responded. “Your rates are going to go up about 10% per year. That’s going to result in conservation.”

“You’ve gone from 375 gallons per year to 250 gallons,” he added.

Bernal stated, “you’re using 100 units per year. That seems a little bit low…for projections.”

“We looked at past models and past growth and that’s what comes in,” Pavletic responded. “When I do water rate studies, I never use the General Plan.”

Freitas asked, “What we’re asking is for an increase of about 10% a year?”

“Yes,” Pavletic responded.

Freitas pressed staff on the debt service for the water department on the 2019 Construction Installment Sale Agreement with the State Water Resources Control Board for the Brackish Water Desalination Plant.
“Antioch is one of the few cities with its own water plant…and we have this new state of the art facility coming online,” Finance Director Dawn Merchant stated.

“For debt service, if we fall below, it’s going to be with us for a long, long time,” Freitas stated. “This is a very dangerous thing to get to for infrastructure financing. Why did we not have rate increases for five years? I don’t get it.”

“There was a number of reasons. Initially and honestly, the water system has enough funds to continue,” said Acting Public Works Director Scott Buenting. “The same time as COVID was going on and giving the residents a break for two, two-year terms.”

“This is kind of a shock for people, 50% over five years,” Freitas stated. “I think we should do things incrementally…when we review the budget.”

“Are we taking into account the entire cost of the (brackish water) project?” Bernal asked. “Yes, Buenting responded.

Asked about the City purchasing less water from the Contra Costa Water District, Buenting responded, “That should be less.”

“Since we’re so close on our ratios we don’t want to have any surprises,” Bernal stated.

“When the water becomes brackish the desalination plant will be operational,” Buenting stated.

“This year?” Freitas asked.

“Yes. This year,” Buenting responded.

“I feel like we have no choice. The consumer cannot deal with these increases,” Freitas stated and made a motion to approve with Rocha later seconding the motion.

Public Comments on Water Rate Increases

“As a consumer, I don’t like it,” said resident Melissa Case. “But Don, you’re a blessing to this conversation. Now, I know where your strengths are. It looks like we have to find to pay our water bills.”

Former Councilwoman Ogorchock spoke next saying, “The council did not approve it. It was one abstention, two yesses and one no. That was the mayor. It wasn’t cost effective for our seniors, and I look out for our seniors.”

She asked about the effect of not voting for it and the possible move of $2 million into the enterprise fund.

Resident and local business owner Jim Lanter said the council had the responsibility for, “public safety, budget. We’ve got to make ourselves fiscally smart. I appreciate the questions, the tough questions. But nobody can afford 10%. I wish we had two-and-a-half percent a year.”

“Those little changes do matter. I would encourage the City to bring forward these rate hikes…and explore rate subsidies. We just have to fill that gap. There are plenty of opportunities out there,” Freitas stated.

“If there is any alternative flexibility for our seniors on fixed incomes,” Rocha mentioned. “This got kicked down the road. So, now we have to address what didn’t get done. But if we can look at our seniors and those who face the biggest struggle.”

“It gets to be a complicated legal issue if you use the enterprise fund to provide subsidies as it is a tax on other ratepayers,” Freitas mentioned.

“I do appreciate your expertise from your experience in the water industry,” Rochas said to Freitas who served on the CCWD Board for 16 years. “We probably should have taken action in 2023. But it is what it is and we have to address it.”

“I just want to make sure General Fund money has not been used to prop up the water fund,” Bernal asked.

“No,” Buenting responded.

“I think that 1.2% needs to be mentioned up front. For the public to understand,” Freitas added.

“I’d like to see something in the staff report to reflect what happens if we don’t pass this,” Bernal said to City Manager Bessie Scott.

The council then approved the process 3-0 which will include Hearing Notices being mailed out to account holders who get to provide input on the proposed rate changes. If written protests against the proposed rate changes are presented by a majority of the parcels or accounts, the city council will not enact the proposed changes. If a majority don’t protest, the council will then vote on a resolution to adjust rates and charges.

If approved, the new FY25 rates will begin May 1st and on Jan. 1, 2026, the new rates for FY 26 will be implemented. Then on July 1st of the following three fiscal years the rates for those years will be implemented.

Meeting Extended for Up to an Hour

The council then voted 3-0 to extend the meeting until midnight, one hour past the normal ending time of 11:00 p.m.

Discusses Annual Financial Reports

Under Item 9 the council considered the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2024, inclusive of the City of Antioch Single Audit Reports for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2024.

“We were deficit spending for the past several fiscal years. We broke even this year. Do we have reserves or are they decreasing? Are we in a financial bind?” Freitas asked.

“As of today, we are not in a financial bind,” Merchant responded.

“We are putting together the 2025-27 budget. I think we will still have that deficit. We are still pulling together the numbers. We will be drawing down on our reserves. The budget stabilization fund which are using the fill the gap should only be used one time,” she continued.

“The ARPA money from the pandemic that ends in April, right?” Freitas asked.

“They had to be obligated by the end of December. But we have until 2026 to spend them. There are some programs that end, like Opportunity Village, that contract ends in April,” Merchant responded referring to the homeless motel on East 18th Street. “We have to look and see how much was allocated to that to continue. Once the money is spent from ARPA it’s gone.”

Freitas asked about claims during the campaign of a $90 billion reserve fund.

“That money is there but you can see $46.4 million of the Budget Stabilization Fund is committed. You really need to look at the $36.5 million,” Merchant stated.

“That’s the really true reserve,” Freitas stated. “Not the $90 million.”

“It’s really supposed to be for one-time projects,” Merchant stated.

“As we go into the budget we have transparency,” Freitas requested of Bernal. “These are real impacts to real people. I’d like the opportunity to educate the staff…the public. If there isn’t any money those projects are in jeopardy.”

“I think lumping the two funds together is misleading,” Rocha stated. “When you look at the ARPA funds which is about 20% of our budget…that’s a significant amount. We’re going to have to look to work with the County. We have a responsibility to be fiscally solvent and spending down our reserves is not the way.

If we can continue the services to our unhoused community maybe we can take housing off the table.”
“Hearing some of the things, tonight, unless we come together and have partnerships in the region, there are going to have to be some serious cuts,” the District 2 councilman continued. “I know that’s not popular. But I didn’t sign up to be popular. We’re going to have to look at grant writing.
Bernal then mentioned amounts of the net pension liability and asked, “Can you explain what the net pension liability is?”

“Is what CalPERS calculates the ultimate liability we have to pay current employees until their descendants are no longer alive,” Merchant responded. They’re calculated on mortality rates.”

“Other post-employment benefits you provide medical…for those employees under that plan…they’re estimated we have to pay until those employees are deceased,” she added.

“Can we break out that amount…on an annualized cost?” Bernal asked. “Yes,” Merchant responded.

The council then voted 3-0 to receive and file the report.

Item 11, the proposed emergency City staffing positions, was tabled until the next council meeting.

Following comments by the city manager offering “kudos” to a variety of City staff members and committee reports by the councilmembers the meeting adjourned at 11:27 p.m.

In compliance with USDOJ agreement; will consist of two former APD personnel

Will receive police chief recruitment presentation

Consider emergency staffing, converting 3 Code Enforcement Officers to other positions

By Allen D. Payton

During their first meeting of the year and the first regular meeting for the newly elected mayor and two members on Tuesday night, Jan. 14, 2024, the Antioch City Council will consider approving an agreement with WBA Consulting & Investigative Services for the police department to comply with the agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice. The amount of the agreement is not to exceed $225,000 through June 30, 2025, with a one-time extension for an additional six months for the same terms.

According to the City staff report for agenda Item 4, the “consultant team that can provide support, guidance, and advice in several areas, which will supplement and enhance the Antioch Police Department’s efficiency and effectiveness. The City requires assistance with overall project management for Police Department operations and administration, policy support, and special project implementation for not only day-to-day operations, but also with compliance efforts identified in the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) settlement agreement with the Antioch Police Department and City of Antioch dated January 2, 2025.” (See related article)

In addition, the staff report reads, “The services provided by WBA Consulting…will be provided by two former Antioch Police Department personnel who have been working within the department as Interim Chief and Interim Captain for the majority of the 2024 year. The team will continue to provide executive police management support and consultation to the Acting Chief and City Manager as it relates to mandatory compliance with relevant federal and state laws, regulations, and rules.”

Police Chief Recruitment Presentation & Process

Under Item 4, the council will be provided with a presentation by Bob Hall & Associates for the recruitment of a permanent police chief. As part of the process, in January and February the firm will Solicit City Council Feedback on Ideal Candidate, Hold Community-wide Feedback Forums (2 in person, 1 Online), Solicit Stakeholder Feedback from the Business Community, Youth & Schools, Faith-based Community, Antioch Police Officers Association and Oher Stakeholders.

The consultants will also Launch a Nationwide Recruitment, Conduct an Online Community Survey and Attend Community Forums for Additional Feedback in each Council District if Requested by Council Members.

Then in February and March Preliminary Screening of Candidates will occur, Candidate Resumes and Cover Letters will be Evaluated to Determine Experience and Education Most Closely Aligned to the City’s Desired Qualifications; the Recruitment Team Will Conduct Screening Interviews with Candidates to Assess which Applicants Should be Moved Forward to the City’s Selection Process and the Most Qualified Candidates will be Presented to the City for Consideration to be Invited to Participate in the Interview Panels.

In March the Candidates will Participate in the following Oral Assessment Panels:
Professional Panel: Consisting Police Chiefs/City Managers
Community Panel: Consisting of Community Members from Each District and a
Staff Panel: Consisting of Leadership Team and other Key Staff Members

In March and April, Candidates Determined to be Most Aligned with the City’s Desired Qualifications will be Invited to an Initial Oral Interview with the City Manager and Additional Community Assessment. If necessary, Finalists will Participate in a Final Interview with the City Manager and then the City Manager will Make the Hiring Decision.

Finally, in April and May, the City will Conduct Background Investigations and other HR Functions and the New Chief Start Date will be Determined.

Carry Concealed Weapon (CCW) License Fee

Under Item 6, the council will consider setting fees for a Carry Concealed Weapons License now that the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office is no longer providing the service to residents of cities.

According to the City staff report. “California Penal Code § 26155(a) requires ‘the chief or other head of a municipal police department of any city’ to issue ‘carry concealed weapons” (CCW) licenses to residents of the city so long as the applicant meets the legal requirements. California Penal Code § 26155(c) allows the chief to enter into “an agreement with the sheriff of the county in which the city is located for the sheriff to process applications for licenses, renewals of licenses, and amendments to licenses…”; however, the sheriff is not required to do this if the population of the county is over 200,000 people.

“For several years, the Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff received, processed, and issued CCW applications for residents of most of the municipalities in Contra Costa County, including the City of Antioch. Recently, the Sheriff advised the municipalities they would no longer be providing this service necessitating the City of Antioch Police Department to implement a CCW process.

“Pursuant to the California Government Code §66000 et seq., and California Penal Code §26190(b)(1), fees can be assessed to recoup an amount equal to the reasonable costs associated with processing CCW applications, issuing CCW licenses, and enforcing the license. The City of Antioch Master Fee Schedule, effective July 1, 2024, does contain a ‘Gun Permit Fee’; however, it is unknown the last time this particular fee was updated, and the established fee does not effectively recoup the costs associated with conducting this activity nor have the appropriate title.

The proposed fees are as follows: New Permit Initial Fee (refundable)- $261.50; Issuance Fee – $261.50; Renewal Permit – $455.00; Amended Permit – $64.00 and Duplicate – $30.00.

Emergency Staffing

Under Item 11, the council will consider approving funds for the following emergency staffing positions for the Finance Department, Human Resources Department, Office of the City Manager, Office of the City Clerk and Conversion of Computer Technician in Information Services: Payroll Specialist; Human Resources Manager; Human Resources Analyst; Public Records Coordinator; Assistant to the City Manager; and conversion of a Computer Technician to Administrative Assistant in Information Services.

The proposal includes conversion of three Code Enforcement Officer (“CEO”) positions.

Meeting Details

The council meeting begins at 6:00 p.m. with a Closed Session to discuss five matters including a significant exposure to litigation, conference with labor negotiators for the Antioch Public Works Employees Association (APWEA) Bargaining Unit, Public Employee Evaluations of the city manager and city attorney, as well as discussing of the police chief employment.

The regular meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers inside City Hall at 200 H Street in historic, downtown Rivertown. The meeting can also be viewed via livestream on the City’s website or on Comcast Local Cable Channel 24 or AT&T U-verse channel 99.

See the complete agenda packet.