Renderings of the proposed Slatten Ranch Townhomes (above) and Wildflower Station Townhomes (below). Source: DeNova Homes
DeNova Homes proposes129-unit Slatten Ranch Townhomes Project, next to J.C. Penney store and 159-unit Wildflower Station Townhomes 2 Multifamily Residential Project on Hillcrest Avenue near Deer Valley Road
By Allen D. Payton
During their regular meeting beginning at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, Sept. 23, 2025, the Antioch City Council will consider approving two new housing projects proposed by developer DeNova Homes whose co-founder and vice-president son accused of allegedly bribing a council member believed to be former Mayor Lamar Hernandez-Thorpe.
As previously reported, on Tuesday, April 22, 2025, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California announced an indictment for alleged bribery of an Antioch Councilmember by the father and son, former and current, leaders of the Concord-based company.
While the project applicant is Kathryn Watt, with DeNova Homes Inc., Dave Sanson is CEO Emeritus and a Co-Founder of the company, with his wife, and their son Trent is the company’s Vice President for Land Acquisition and Entitlements. Dave’s attorney Winston Chan claims his client had nothing to do with the alleged bribery, writing, “We are confident the facts will show that Dave is innocent, and that he was unfairly targeted.”
According to the company’s Chief Legal Officer, Dana Tsubota, “While Mr. (Dave) Sanson has been an important figure in the company’s history, he semi-retired in 2020 when he moved to Montana and he is no longer involved in the leadership or daily operations.”
In the indictment, the terms “he” and “him” are used to describe the unnamed councilmember, which could refer to either former Mayor Lamar Hernandez-Thorpe or former Councilman Mike Barbanica.
The alleged bribe was related to a previous project in Antioch, known as Aviano, a multi-phase, 533-unit single-family home residential development in the Sand Creek area on the south side of the city.
Proposed Slatten Ranch Townhome Project Site Map. Source: DeNova Homes
Slatten Ranch Townhomes Project
The first DeNova Homes project the Council will consider Tuesday night is the 129-unit Slatten Ranch Townhome Condominium Project. The application includes a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for 17 residential lots for the 17 condominium buildings.
According to the City staff report for the agenda item, #4, the proposed 6.41-acre vacant project site is located north of Wicklow Way, east of Slatten Ranch Road, and west of Empire Avenue. The project site is located within the East Lone Tree Specific Plan (ELTSP), is designated as East Lone Tree Specific Plan Focus Area in the City of Antioch General Plan and the site is zoned
High Density Residential District (R-25) allowing for the development of multifamily housing with a density of 20 to 25 dwelling units (du)/acre.
Although the land was part of 200 acres designated by the City Council in 1998 for employment and commercial and development purposes, in February of 2023, the City of Antioch adopted the Housing Element EIR, which analyzed adoption and implementation of the City’s Sixth Cycle Housing Element Update (2023-2031), including the adoption and implementation of rezoning and General Plan amendments to accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), requiring 3,016 more housing units in Antioch between 2023 and 2031.
Each residential unit would include a two-car garage, and the centrally located play area would include 19 additional vehicle parking spaces. The 129 residential units would consist of a mix of two- and three-bedrooms units, ranging in size from 1,293 to 1,791 square feet.
Slatten Ranch Townhome Development Plan. Source: DeNova Homes
The Row Townhome buildings include entryways with covered porches at the front elevations and garages at the rear elevations. The Back-to-Back (B2B) Townhome buildings will include entryways with covered porches and garages at both the front and rear elevations. Each building would have either five, six, eight or 10 units. Three Row Townhome floorplan types would be offered with two- and three-bedrooms, ranging in size from 1,432 to 1,791 square feet. Two B2B floorplan types would be offered with two- and three-bedrooms ranging in size from 1,293 to 1,414 square feet.
The proposed project would include a total of 1.77 acres of landscaping and open space, consisting of a 0.34-acre open play area, dog park, and open space for bio retention.
The project was submitted in 2023 as a Preliminary Housing Application under SB330 (The Housing Crisis Act of 2019). Through the Preliminary Application process put in place under SB 330, housing developments may only be subject to the ordinances and objective standards in effect at the time when a completed Preliminary Application is submitted.
Proposed Wildflower Station Townhomes 2 Project Site Map. Source: DeNova Homes
Wildflower Station Townhomes 2
The second DeNova Homes project the Council will consider is a 159-unit townhome-style condominium development, known as Wildflower Station Townhomes 2 Multifamily Residential Project. It is planned for the four-parcel, 10.35 acre vacant property near the intersection of Hillcrest Avenue and Deer Valley Road and bordered by Wildflower Drive to the east and the road next to the KFC restaurant in the Hillcrest Crossroads shopping center which also serves the existing condo development.
According to the City staff report for the agenda item, #5, the proposed project consists of a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to create 19 residential lots for 19 three-story buildings, containing 159 new townhome condominiums in two different building styles: “back-to-back” and row townhome-style. Both styles of townhomes include individual one-car or two-car garages with the living areas primarily on the second and third levels above the garage parking.
The proposed project would include a total of 2.8 acres of landscaping and open space, consisting of two open play areas and open space for bioretention. The play areas would include 25 additional parking spaces with another 57 surplus shared parking spaces with the adjacent Wildflower Station development. The 159 residential units would consist of a mix of two- and three-bedrooms units, ranging in size from 1,135 to 1,381 square feet.
Rendering of proposed Wildflower Station Back-Back Townhomes. Source: DeNova Homes
The project site was part of the larger 23-acre Wildflower Station project that includes 22 single family homes (on the ridgeline above), the 98-condominium stacked flat homes immediately adjacent and planned commercial development that was entitled in 2018. The single-family homes and condos were built, but the commercial parcels along Hillcrest Avenue (the current project site) weren’t and the land sat undeveloped.
In 2023, the City Council revised the General Plan and rezoned the four parcels to High Density Residential District (R-25). The proposed project would result in a density of approximately 20 du/ac.
The project was also submitted in 2023 as a Preliminary Housing Application under SB330.
Meeting Information
The Council’s regular meeting will be preceded by a Closed Session meeting beginning at 4:00 p.m. during which the Council will consider the use of the City-owned parking lot at the north end of G Street by developer Sean McCauley, owner of the adjacent property at 113 G Street, which is planned to be a restaurant. (See related article) That will be followed by a Special Meeting at 5:30 p.m. to appoint a new City Clerk. (See related article)
The meetings will be held in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 200 H Street, in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown. They can also be viewed via livestream on the City’s website and the City’s YouTube Channel, on Comcast Cable Channel 24 or AT&T U-verse Channel 99.
Efforts to reach media representatives in the U.S. Attorney’s Office to verify if the investigation is ongoing or if settled, the disposition of the case were unsuccessful prior to publication time. Please check back later for any updates to this report.
Would require developers to allocate percentage of housing units in market-rate developments as affordable or below-market rate
May increase costs to new home buyers, reduce number of new housing units; “there would likely be a fiscal impact” to City, possibly increase revenue from developer fees
By Allen D. Payton
During a special meeting tonight, Tuesday, September 16, 2025, beginning at 6:00 p.m., the Antioch City Council will hold a study session to discuss a possible Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO) and give direction to staff to develop one for a future vote.
According to the City staff report for the one item on the agenda, “An IHO, often referred to as inclusionary zoning, is an ordinance that requires developers to allocate a percentage of housing units in market-rate developments as affordable, or below-market rate (BMR) units.” Staff is recommending the Council support an IHO and a apply a 15% total inclusionary requirement to both rental and for-sale projects.
Background: “On May 27, 2025, the City Council held a study session on the possible adoption of an IHO, which is an Implementation Measure contained within the City’s Certified 6th Cycle Housing Element at Program 2.1.10. The possible adoption of an IHO can also be used for compliance with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Transit Oriented Communities (MTC TOC) Policy, as discussed in the May 27, 2025 staff report, linked below.
“Staff and the project team provided a project overview, discussed the legal and local contexts of IHOs, presented the draft financial feasibility analysis, discussed the outreach process to date, and detailed next steps. Members of the community provided public input, however, due to time constraints, the City Council was unable to provide feedback and direction to staff.
“A second study session was held by the City Council on August 26, 2025. Similar to the prior study session, members of the public provided input and yet again, the City Council was unable to provide feedback and direction to staff due to the lateness of the hour. The City Council requested a Special Meeting for consideration of an IHO and has dedicated tonight’s meeting to this singular policy discussion.”
Staff Questions and Recommendations to Council
During tonight’s study session the staff are asking for answers from the Council on a variety of questions to develop an ordinance including:
Should staff move forward with preparation of an IHO? Staff Recommendation: Yes.
Should the IHO apply to rental projects, for-sale projects, or both? Staff Recommendation: Both
Should the IHO include specific income category breakdowns – for example 5% VLI (Very Low Income), 5% LI, 5% MI – or should the developer be able to choose any affordability or combination of affordabilities? Other breakdowns could be 5% ELI, and 10% VLI or 5% ELI, 5% VLI & 5% LI or 3% ELI, 7% VLI & 5% LI, etc. Staff Recommendation: 15% total inclusionary requirement and this should apply to rental and for-sale projects.
Should rental housing and for sale housing have different inclusionary requirements or the same inclusionary requirements? Staff Recommendation: Breakdown of specific income categories: 5% ELI, 5% VLI, 5% LI Maintain compliance with the MTC TOC Policy.
Should rental housing and for sale housing have different inclusionary requirements or the same inclusionary requirements? Staff Recommendation: All housing types maintain the same inclusionary requirements.
What should the threshold project size be to be included in the IHO? Staff Recommendation: Developments of 5 units and projects less than 5 pay an in-lieu fee.
Should the units be affordable in perpetuity? Staff Recommendation: Yes.
Should an in-lieu fee option be included as an alternative means? And should other alternative means be included? Staff Recommendation: An in-lie fee option should be included.
Should the ordinance encourage on-site construction? If so, then by what means? Staff Recommendation: Encourage on-site construction by requiring a higher inclusionary ordinance requirement when a developer pays the in-lieu fee.
Should there be developer incentives, beyond State Density Bonus Law? If so, by what means? Staff Recommendation: Waivers and fee deferrals
Challenges With IHO’s
According to the National Housing Conference, “ While advocates view inclusionary zoning as a way to increase the stock of economically integrated affordable homes at little cost to the public, critics charge that inclusionary zoning policies amount to a ‘tax’ on new development that unduly burdens developers and adversely impacts the cost and availability of market-rate homes.”
In addition, “Common opposition arguments include:
Inclusionary zoning ordinances increase the cost of new development, which may then be passed on to market-rate buyers through increased home prices.
Inclusionary zoning ordinances cause developers to build fewer units — either because developers choose to build in jurisdictions without inclusionary policies and/or because the inclusionary policies change the economics of development such that other land uses (e.g., retail) are more profitable.
By reducing the supply of new homes, inclusionary policies increase the cost of market-rate housing in the community implementing the policy and in neighboring areas (as reductions in supply in one jurisdiction may increase home prices for the whole metropolitan area by reducing the supply of housing available to satisfy the area’s demand).
Inclusionary zoning policies unfairly place the burden of economic integration on housing developers.
The possibility that units produced by an inclusionary housing program might have a negative impact on nearby home values.”
A commentary on SRQmagazine.com by Christine Robinson, Executive Director of The Argus Foundation, entitled, The Negative Effects of Inclusionary Housing reports, “According to a study on Pittsburgh’s (Pennsylvania) inclusionary zoning policies, developers often respond to mandatory affordability requirements by decreasing the total number of units they build. This occurs because the cost of providing affordable units often makes projects financially unfeasible. As developers struggle to balance profitability with affordability requirements, some may abandon projects that require affordable housing even with increased density or scale back their ambitions.”
“While inclusionary zoning policies aim to create a more equitable housing market, the negative effects seen in Pittsburgh and elsewhere demonstrate that these policies may have unintended consequences that worsen housing affordability and reduce the availability of housing overall.”
Possible Fiscal Impacts to the City
Also according to the staff report, “Should the City Council choose to adopt an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance in the future there would likely be a fiscal impact due to increased staffing and administrative costs to implement the ordinance. There is also the possibility of additional revenue generation for housing production should the City Council choose to adopt an in-lieu fee as an alternative means of compliance.”
The Contra Costa Water District Canal Replacement Project includes 20 miles of the waterway. Photo: CCWD
Lake Shasta is source of all water, Los Vaqueros Reservoir will not be expanded, CoCoTax members learn
By Allen D. Payton
During the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association Members and Leaders monthly luncheon in May, Contra Costa Water District Board President, Ernesto Avila provided an update on the district’s current work and plans. They include repairing 20 of the 48-mile canal at a cost of $1 billion, keeping water rates as low as possible and expanding service to keep up with growth.
The district includes the Central County cities and communities of Martinez, Pleasant Hill, Concord, Clayton, Pacheco, Clyde, Port Costa and portions of Walnut Creek, and in East County, the cities and communities of Pittsburg, Antioch, Oakley, Bay Point, and portions of Brentwood.
CCWD Board President Ernesto Avila provides an update during the CoCo Taxpayers Association luncheon on May 23, 2025. Photo: Allen D. Payton
Half of the district’s water is provided to treated water customers and the other half to raw water customers, Avila stated and then spoke about ensuring adequate “water supply during disasters such as fire and earthquake emergencies.”
“When PG&E outages occur all of our tanks go full,” he shared. “Water only stays sweet for six to seven days to meet the water quality requirements of the state.”
“Lake Shasta is where we get all of our water from through the Central Valley Project,” he continued. “It’s currently 94% full.”
The district owns Los Vaqueros Reservoir for storage, which is currently 93% full. But “we can’t just draw water whenever we want,” Avila stated. “All of our intakes are screened to protect fish.”
“We are out of our drought,” Avila added. However, “during the drought there were no constraints on water supply for development and growth.”
Source: CCWD
Canal Replacement Program
There have been “landslides on the west side of the canal and repairs can cost millions,” he stated and spoke of the district’s “Canal Replacement Program” which will cost “$1 billion”.
“Nobody likes to raise rates,” Avila continued. “We’ve replaced four miles, so far and have 16 miles to go. It will be a pipeline”
Asked what happens to the pipe during an earthquake he said, “If it’s an older pipe, it will probably crack. We’re looking at a very ductile pipe that can move easily.”
Avila then spoke about providing enough water to meet the demands of residential growth including “redevelopment of the Concord Naval Weapons station” where “15,000 homes” are projected to be built.
“Ten percent of the district’s water is provided through recycling,” he stated. “We want to bump that up to fifteen percent.”
Budget & Water Costs to Users
“Energy costs have been the greatest increases from 2020 to 2024, medical coverage is second greatest,” he shared. Those are followed by “pension and OPEB (other post employee benefit) liabilities.”
“The average customer spends about $3.00 per day for water,” Avila stated. “The cost is 1.3 cents per gallon per day.”
He compared that to EBMUD rates which are at 2.0 cents per gallon.
Contra Costa Water District Production Costs. Source: CCWD
According to the slide show from his presentation, costs to the district for water production include the following:
INVESTMENTS IN INFRASTRUCTURE – Pipeline Renewal, Canal Replacement, Water Treatment Plant Upgrades;
PURCHASED WATER
WATER SUPPLY AND RESOURCE PROTECTION – Water Supply Planning, Watershed Management, Recreation;
SYSTEM OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE – Water Treatment, Water Delivery, Leak Inspection and Repair;
ADMINISTRATION – Human Resources, Safety, Accounting and Payroll;
CUSTOMER CARE – Customer Service, Billing, Water Efficiency Support, and Public Affairs; and
COMMUNITY EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT K-12 Water Education and Field Trips, and Internships.
The district has an AAA Bond Rating which keeps interest costs on bonds down, Avila shared.
He was then asked about “money going to DEI programs. I this something you should be doing anymore?” Avila responded, “there are three employees dedicated to it. There are 317 employees which is 30-40% of the budget We have one person in Human Resources dedicated to it. We have a $200 million per year budget. Not even one percent is dedicated to it.”
“It’s about trying to enhance the culture for our employees to work together better,” he added. “We review it every six months. Our Master Plan is on the website.”
Asked about “EPA clean water requirements getting tougher each year” Avila spoke about “unfunded mandates we have to comply with. We work with various associations and collaborate on a national level as regulations are mostly at the federal level.”
“Our biggest concern is the issue of diminishing return on conservation,” he explained. “During the drought, people in our area reduced use by 25 percent while Southern California only reduced 2-3 percent.”
According to the chart in Avila’s presentation total water use has actually decreased over the past 17 years even though the population has significantly increased.
Source: CCWD
No Los Vaqueros Capacity Increase Due to Too Much Cost and Regulation, Offline for Too Long
Asked about increasing capacity at Los Vaqueros, Avila said, “The district spent $10 million on raising the…reservoir, for a cost/benefit analysis funded by the state. It was over subscribed with more customer demand than supply, 250,000 versus 120,000 acre feet.”
“But with so many constraints on pumping water into the reservoir, demand dropped to 50,000 acre feet then to zero,” he continued. “The cost increase with inflation went from $800 million to $1.6 billion, mainly from more material and labor cost increases, plus, engineering costs.”
Finally, Avila shared, “Los Vaqueros Reservoir would have had to be offline for six to seven years. It just wasn’t viable. They knew that, going in. The issue was negotiating supply from EBMUD and others” who “couldn’t guarantee any water.”
He also spoke about future supply including the proposed offstream Sites Reservoir project west of Colusa in the Sacramento Valley.
“In California, for every one million acre-feet of storage, there is eight to nine acre-feet of surface storage,” Avila stated.
Finally, in response to a question, he said, “Water from a canal behind a house is not grandfathered in if the home is sold.”
The next CoCoTax Members and Board Luncheon will be held on Friday June 27, 2025, at 11:45 AM at Denny’s Restaurant, 1313 Willow Pass Road in Concord, and will feature Oakland Mayor recall leader Seneca Scott as the speaker. Advance registration is available on the CoCoTax website where you can pay online, or bring cash or check on Friday and pay at the door: $25 for members, $30 for guests. www.cocotax.org/event-6189658/Registration
About CoCoTax
Founded in 1937, CoCoTax leads the way in providing fiscal oversight of local government. We actively resist unwarranted taxes and fees, discriminatory regulations, ill-advised public expenditures and government secrecy, inefficiency and waste. For more information and membership visit www.cocotax.org.
About CCWD
The Contra Costa Water District delivers safe, clean water to approximately 520,000 people in central and eastern Contra Costa County in Northern California. Formed in 1936 to provide water for irrigation and industry, we are now one of the largest urban water districts in California and a leader in drinking-water treatment technology and source water protection. For more information visit www.ccwater.com.
Will consider adopting “Pride Month” proclamation, flying “Pride Progress” flag at City Hall in June
By Allen D. Payton
At their meeting on Tuesday, May 27, 2025, the Antioch City Council will discuss the possible adoption of an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance for more below-market-rate housing during a Special Meeting Study Session at 5:00 p.m. They will also receive a Land Use Housing Planning and Permitting Presentation and consider increasing spending on violence prevention programs using state grant funds. The regular meeting begins at 7:00 p.m.
Before the regular and special meetings, the Council will first hold a Closed Session at 4:00 p.m.
Closed Session on Civil Rights Lawsuit, Sale of Land to Fire District and Business Owner
During Closed Session beginning at 4:00 p.m. the Council will discuss an existing lawsuit by Trent Allen, et al. v. City of Antioch, et al., U.S.D.C. N. Dist. Cal. Case No. 3:23-cv-01895-VC (and consolidated cases). Allen is one of four suspects convicted of the 2021 murder of Arnold Marcel Hawkins and the attempted murder of Aaron Patterson. (See related article) He and a variety of other plaintiffs claim civil rights violations by several current and former Antioch Police officers.
In addition, the Council will consider the sale of a lot at E. 18th and Wilson Streets to the Contra Costa Fire District and a small portion of land near the Antioch Marina to local business owner Sean McCauley who owns the land where Smith’s Landing Seafood Grill is located.
Study Session on Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
During the Special Meeting beginning at 5:00 p.m., the Council will hold a Study Session to discuss the possible adoption of an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO) as Program 2.1.10 in the City’s existing Housing Element. According to the City staff report for the agenda item, inclusionary ordinances are designed to produce affordable housing and require that a specific percentage of units in market-rate development projects be offered at below-market rates.
IHOs may include requirements for rental and/or for-sale housing projects and may include different requirements for rental and for-sale housing projects, projects of different sizes and locations and housing units of different levels of affordability.
The three categories of affordable housing typically accommodated in IHOs are:
Very Low-Income (VLI) Housing. Units affordable to households earning 0-50% of the Area Median Income (AMI).
Low-Income (LI) Housing. Units affordable to households earning 51-80% of AMI.
Moderate Income (MI) Housing. Units affordable to households earning 80-120% of AMI.
IHOs typically include different requirements for these three above income levels.
Previously Considered & Rejected by Council
The staff report further reads, Antioch has considered adopting an IHO since approximately 2009. Past City leadership concluded that market rate housing in Antioch was already adequately affordable. In 2016, the Contra Costa Grand Jury released a report titled Where will we Live: The Affordable Housing Waiting List is Closed. The report recommended that Antioch should consider adopting an IHO. The City responded to this recommendation on August 9, 2016, stating that the City, assuming 2000-2009 home values, “already provides a diversity of housing options and is accessible to households of all income levels…” Therefore, an IHO was “not warranted and is not reasonable.”
The inclusion of Program 2.1.10 in the Antioch Housing Element is indicative of current statewide and local housing challenges and new housing priorities. Technical analyses and community outreach performed as part of the Housing Element demonstrate the need for housing-forward policies and the potential value of an IHO.
Community Survey & Virtual Workshop, Developer Input
Also, according to the staff report, a community survey was conducted but only more than 50 residents responded. Over 80% of responders either “Fully” or “Somewhat” support an IHO in Antioch but over 60% are either “Unfamiliar” or “Somewhat familiar” with IHOs.
The IHO Project team conducted a virtual Focus Group with local housing developers on December 5, 2024. Attendees were shown the results of preliminary feasibility analyses for a 15 percent inclusionary requirement and shared their concerns:
o Concern over reliance on density bonus. Developers stressed that maintaining feasibility under inclusionary regulation is often based on maximizing State density bonus. However, the costs associated with constructing denser, taller projects may outweigh financial returns. Developers described Antioch as a “secondary market” that cannot support multifamily projects over three stories tall, which may limit additional density.
o Necessity of in-lieu fees. Developers stated that if the City were to adopt an IHO, it should include the option to pay in-lieu fees. Participants stressed that real estate is unpredictable, and that these fees offer vital “stability and
clarity” in the IHO process. Because of this certainty, most developers will choose the in-lieu fee option.
o Value of in-lieu fees. Developers stated that in-lieu fees can be transferred to affordable housing developers who specialize in maximizing funds and partnerships for affordable housing projects. Developers stressed that partnering with affordable housing developers in mixed-income developments often provides the greatest number of affordable units at the lowest income levels.
o Barriers to for-sale affordable housing. Developers stressed that the difficulty of qualifying for home loans may impede the function of an IHO. Per participants, lower income households in Contra Costa typically face severe economic barriers to mortgage qualification, including an adequate down payment. As such, requiring the construction of for-sale units for very low-income or low-income households may be an unproductive path toward privately subsidized affordable housing.
In addition to the community survey, the staff report, without mentioning the number of participants, shares that members of the public participated in a bilingual, interactive virtual Community Workshop on February 4, 2025. Participants were introduced to the IHO project and responded to a series of Zoom-based polls regarding various IHO topics. The polls included the following questions:
1. What household affordability levels do you want to see accommodated in Antioch?
64% of responders selected Very Low-Income households as the most needed.
2. What bedroom counts are most needed in affordable units in Antioch?
67% of responders selected 2-3 bedroom units.
3. What type of affordable housing units does Antioch need?
“For-rent apartments” was identified as the most needed housing type, and “for-sale single family homes” was identified as the least needed.
4. Should the default requirement in Antioch’s IHO be “constructing affordable units with the option to pay a fee,” or “paying a fee with the option to construct affordable units?”
67% of responders selected “constructing affordable units with the option to pay a fee.”
5. Select areas of Antioch where new affordable housing will provide extra benefit to future residents.
The two answers that received the most selections were “In and near downtown” and “Around the BART Station.”
6. What are the most important aspects of affordable units created by the IHO?
The two answers that received the most selections were “They are evenly distributed across the development site” and “Their exterior design and construction quality matches the market rate units.”
7. Participants were asked whether 1) They support adopting an IHO and to identify issues the City Council should consider ensuring the IHO is effective, or 2) They do not support adopting an IHO and to identify alternative approaches to increasing affordable housing.
78 percent of participants stated they support adopting an IHO. Comments included:
The need to place upper limits on IHO requirements.
The value of collaborating with developers on a 15% IHO requirement near transit.
Lack of support for in-lieu fees, which require significant staff resources to administer.
22 percent of participants stated they do support adopting an IHO.
Comments included:
The City should purchase land for 100% affordable housing. This is the only way to build the minimum of more than 1 new affordable home for every market rate home.
Antioch is already largely affordable; the City should focus on fully staffing the police force and bringing anchor businesses to downtown and shopping mall.
IHOs benefit only a few who can secure the units, while driving up costs for everyone else. Antioch should look for alternative sources of funding that do not drive up housing costs.
No decision will be made during Tuesday’s meeting, and any adoption of an IHO must occur during a future council meeting.
Regular Meeting Agenda
A day after Memorial Day, although complaints have arisen across the country, that veterans and those who died defending freedom each only get one day to be honored and remembered annually, during their regular meeting, under item 1, the Council will consider adopting a “Pride Month” proclamation and under Consent Calendar item R, approval of flying the “Pride Progress” flag at City Hall during the month of June to recognize the LGBTQIA+ community in Antioch. It will be only the seventh year the Council will be asked to consider and vote on both matters.
Under item 3, the Council will receive a Land Use Housing Planning and Permitting Presentation by David Storer, Interim Community Development Director and Derek Cole, Interim City Attorney. They will discuss Land Use regulations/permits (Discretionary and Ministerial…i.e., Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Rezonings, CEQA, General Plans and the Subdivision Map Act, etc.). as well as Housing (State laws and their implementation…HAA, SB 330, SB9, etc.).
The Council will then vote on item 5, to adopt the new Master Fee Schedule effective July 1, 2025, which includes minor increases to several fees and no changes to most.
The Council will also consider increasing the amounts paid for violence prevention programs using state grant funds. Under item 6 they will consider approving the second amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with One Day at a Time (ODAT), with fiscal sponsor Community Initiatives, for the City of Antioch’s 2022–2025
California Violence Intervention and Prevention (CalVIP) grant. The amendment increases the total contract amount by $587,174 to an amount not to exceed $927,980 and extends the term of the agreement through June 30, 2026.
Finally, under item 7, the Council will consider approving the third amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with Advance Peace for Technical Assistance/Support, Training and development for the 2022-25 City of Antioch’s California Violence Intervention and Prevention (CalVIP) in the amount of $50,000.
The meeting will be held inside the Council Chambers at City Hall, 200 H Street in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown. It can be viewed via livestream on the City’s website, on Comcast local access cable channel 24 or on ATT U-verse channel 99. See the complete meeting agenda package.
Coffee mug and cash allegedly used in the bribery scheme. Source: U.S. DOJ
Co-founder and son, a company VP, of DeNova Homes, developed Aviano project in Sand Creek area, Wildflower
Corporate attorney says company “not implicated”
Target, referred to as “he” and “him”, could be either former Mayor Hernández-Thorpe or Councilman Barbanica
“We are confident the facts will show that Dave is innocent, and that he was unfairly targeted,” – attorney Winston Chan
By Allen D. Payton
On Tuesday, April 22, 2025, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California issued the following announcement about an indictment for alleged bribery of an Antioch Councilmember by the father and son, former and current, leaders of Concord-based DeNova Homes. The company developed the Aviano new home project in Antioch’s Sand Creek Area and The Pointe at Wildflower Station project overlooking the condominiums near the Hillcrest Avenue/Davison Drive and Deer Valley Road intersection. In addition, the Sansons’ Yellow Roof Foundation is coordinating with DeNova homes to pursue a smaller housing project on the north side of the city.
A two-count indictment was unsealed today charging property developers David Sanson and Trent Sanson with conspiracy and bribery in connection with offering to pay an Antioch City Councilmember $10,000 and later giving the Councilmember a company travel mug with $5,000 in cash, in exchange for favorable treatment for one of their development projects. The Councilmember reported the alleged bribe to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Both defendants made their initial appearances in federal court this morning.
According to the indictment filed April 3, 2025, David Sanson, 60, of Philipsburg, Mont., is the owner and Chief Executive Officer of a home building and development company based in Concord, Calif., and his son, Trent Sanson, 33, of Walnut Creek, Calif., is the Vice President. The development company has a number of projects in Antioch and neighboring areas, including the Aviano project, a multi-phase 533-unit residential development project.
Dave Sanson is DeNova Homes’ Co-Founder and CEO Emeritus, and his son Trent Sanson is the company’s Vice President for Land Acquisition & Entitlements. Source: Yellow Roof Foundation
As alleged, the Antioch Engineering and Development Services Division indicated that the development company had not completed all of its required public infrastructure improvements and that Phase 3 of the Aviano project should not be deemed complete or approved by the City Council until those improvements were completed. As a result, the City of Antioch had not approved the release of bonds secured for the project. To get the Antioch Engineering and Development Services Division to affirm completion and release the bonds associated with the project, Trent Sanson allegedly contacted an Antioch City Councilmember via iMessage on May 29, 2024, stating that he wanted to discuss with the Councilmember issues that the development company was facing with the Antioch “Engineering department” on a number of projects, including Phase 3 of the Aviano project.
“The indictment describes a video-recorded meeting between the Councilmember and Trent Sanson on June 12, 2024, during which Trent Sanson allegedly stated that he wanted the Councilmember to place on the City Council agenda, and vote in favor of, “acceptance for Phase 3 at Aviano to release the completion and guarantee bonds . . . .” Trent Sanson allegedly stated that David Sanson was willing to pay the Councilmember $10,000 in exchange for the requested actions. A second video-recorded meeting took place on June 20, 2024, at which David Sanson allegedly paid the Councilmember $5,000 in cash concealed in a travel coffee mug branded with the logo of the Sansons’ development company.
“This indictment alleges that the defendants tried to bribe an Antioch City Councilmember to take favorable action on their real estate project and to evade having to make the public infrastructure improvements that the City required,” said Acting United States Attorney Patrick D. Robbins. “This case is another example of my Office’s commitment to working closely with our partners at the FBI to root out bribery and attempts to corrupt public office.”
“Attempting to bribe a public official is a blatant attack on the integrity of our government and the trust of the communities we serve,” said FBI Special Agent in Charge Sanjay Virmani. “The allegations in this case reflect a clear attempt to manipulate the system for personal gain. The FBI will continue to aggressively investigate and hold accountable anyone who seeks to corrupt public institutions through bribery or abuse of power.”
The defendants are next scheduled to appear in district court on June 12, 2025, for a status conference before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers.
The indictment charges each defendant with one count of conspiracy to commit bribery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 and one count of bribery concerning programs receiving federal funds in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(2). The bribery count also includes an allegation that defendants aided and abetted one another in bribing the Antioch City Councilmember.
An indictment merely alleges that crimes have been committed, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If convicted, defendants each face a maximum sentence of five years in prison for the count under 18 U.S.C. § 371 and 10 years in prison for the count under 18 U.S.C. §§ 666(a)(2). Any sentence following conviction would be imposed by the court after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Thomas R. Green and Benjamin K. Kleinman are prosecuting the case with the assistance of Amala James and Laurie Worthen. The prosecution is the result of an investigation by the FBI.
Two Former Councilmembers Respond
The two current and two former council members and former Mayor Lamar Hernández-Thorpe, who were serving during the time the alleged incidents occurred, were asked if they were aware of the indictment and if they were the unnamed councilmember. Former District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock said simply, “It wasn’t me,” and former District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica responded, “I won’t comment on an active federal investigation. I took the same stance when I was on the council.”
No responses were received from Hernández-Thorpe nor District 1 and 4 Councilwomen Tamisha Torres-Walker and Monica Wilson.
DeNova Homes’ Chief Legal Officer Responds
Efforts to reach the Sansons were unsuccessful. But DeNova Homes, Inc.’s Chief Legal Officer, Dana Tsubota, responded with the following statement:
“DeNova Homes is aware of the legal matter involving our founder, Dave Sanson, and his son, Trent. While Mr. Sanson has been an important figure in the company’s history, he semi-retired in 2020 when he moved to Montana and he is no longer involved in the leadership or daily operations.
“Importantly, DeNova Homes is not implicated in the government’s investigation. DeNova remains financially sound and fully focused on delivering for our customers, partners, and communities without disruption.
“Under the leadership of President Ryan Parlett and our experienced executive team, DeNova continues its mission of building high-quality homes and supporting the communities we serve.”
According to the company’s website, Dave is a Co-Founder and CEO Emeritus, and according to theorg.com website, Trent is the company’s Vice President for Land Acquisition & Entitlements.
Source: U.S. DOJ
Indictment Claims Request Made “to place” Item “on the…Council agenda, and vote in favor”
The indictment claims, “TRENT SANSON and DAVID SANSON bribed the Councilmember during video recorded meetings, including a meeting at which TRENT SANSON offered the $10,000 bribe to the Councilmember and a subsequent meeting at which DAVID SANSON gave the Councilmember a travel coffee mug branded with the Development Company’s logo and name containing $5,000 in cash.”
The indictment includes quotes from the unnamed councilmember but uses the term “him” in reference in Section 17. Sections 15 through 17 lay out the allegations which read as follows:
June 12, 2024: T. SANSON Bribes the Councilmember
15. On or about June 12, 2024, T. SANSON met with the Councilmember and stated that he wanted the Councilmember to place on the Antioch City Council agenda, and vote in favor of, the following item: “A tract acceptance for Phase 3 at Aviano to release the completion and guarantee bonds ….” T. SANSON asked the Councilmember for the Councilmember’s assistance and vote in the hopes that the Antioch City Council would approve release of the bond and effectively override the Antioch Engineering and Development Services Division’s position that further work was required by the Development Company to complete its obligations on Phase 3 of Aviano.
16. In exchange for the Councilmember’s actions, T. SANSON told the Councilmember that he spoke with his father, D. SANSON, in advance of the meeting, and D. SANSON was “willing” to pay the Councilmember $10,000. T. SANSON stated, “[YJou’re not going to see anything directly, but Dave will be doing something for you[.]” T. SANSON then added, “I don’t know if it’s an IE or through a PAC because we … can give to a PAC and then the PAC isn’t limited, you know what I mean?” Shortly thereafter, T. SANSON reiterated, “I’m pretty sure we’ll go through one of the PACs.” T. SANSON ultimately told the Councilmember that he’d check with D. SANSON to determine if they could pay $5,000 to the Councilmember’s IE account and $5,000 in cash. T. SANSON stated that the split “sounds fair.” The Councilmember informed the FBI of the bribe offer by T. SANSON.
Mentions “the primary” and “the general” Elections; Refers to Councilmember as “He” and “Him”
Upon reading the indictment, the terms “he” and “him” are used to describe the unnamed councilmember.
June 20. 2024: D. SANSON Pays the Bribe Initiated bv T. SANSON
17. On or about June 20, 2024, D. SANSON met with the Councilmember. During the meeting, D. SANSON told the Councilmember, “Anyways, Trent called me and told me that he met with you last week, and 1 told him OK let me take care of it. 1 don’t want you involved.” D. SANSON thanked the Councilmember for meeting with him, stating, “1 know it was last minute, but this had to be done in person.” D. SANSON informed the Councilmember that he’d been in touch with the political consultant running the Councilmember’s IE, stating, “[That’s all still on track for round two. We did it during the primary, and now for the general – we’re back committed to supporting you and all that. So, 1 just want you to know that’s happening – that it’s not just a false commitment or anything like that; and then Trent told me you needed a little extra shot.” D. SANSON then handed the Councilmember a travel coffee mug branded with the Development Company insignia, which contained $5,000 in cash. The Councilmember informed D. SANSON that he had a detailed conversation with T. SANSON, and that he understood what D. SANSON and T. SANSON were asking him to do. D. SANSON replied, “Yeah – Phase 3,” and reiterated, “the project has been finished.” The Councilmember informed the FBI of D. SANSON’s bribe and gave the money to the FBI.
In response to a request for comment, Dave Sanson’s attorney Winston Chan of the San Francisco office for the Gibson Dunn & Crutcher law firm denied the accusations against the developer.
“My client Dave Sanson is a respected business leader and philanthropist with a 30-year track record of building homes and supporting communities across Northern California.
We are reviewing the government’s allegations closely and caution against any rush to judgment based on mere allegations that present a one-sided story. We are confident the facts will show that Dave is innocent, and that he was unfairly targeted without cause to be dragged out of near retirement from out-of-state, to be trapped into a web of deceit manufactured to ‘take down’ Dave and his family by a controversial local politico, whose own suspect personal motivations we look forward to exposing.
It’s incredibly disappointing that Dave’s reputation—built on a decades-long career of creating opportunities for residents of cities like Antioch, that have struggled for years to keep up with housing needs and other challenges—is being dragged through the mud.
Dave and our team look forward to addressing this matter in court.”
Unnamed Councilmember Could Be Either Hernández-Thorpe or Barbanica
While only the mayor has the authority to place items on a city council meeting agenda, Barbanica was the only candidate of the five incumbent council members, last year, who ran during both the primary and general elections for the County Board of Supervisors. So, the “him” could refer to either one.
Sanson company contribution to Thorpe’s #Beat the Karen Recall committee made on Jan. 14, 2022. Source: Thorpe committee Form 460
Recall Campaign Contribution from Sanson Company to Hernández-Thorpe in 2022
During the effort to recall Hernández-Thorpe in 2022, the then-mayor’s campaign committee received a $10,000 contribution from another of the Sansons’ companies, Civic Park Properties, Inc. State law has since changed and the maximum contribution a developer who has business before a local agency can contribute to one of its elected members is $250.
No Contributions to Either Hernández-Thorpe, Barbanica or IE Committee Supporting Either in 2024
But a search of Form 460 campaign finance reports showed no contributions could be found of any amount over $100 from either of the Sansons, DeNova Homes or their companies that were made last year to either Hernández-Thorpe’s re-election committee, Barbanica’s campaign committee or the independent expenditure (IE) committee supporting Barbanica’s election entitled, “Citizens for a Safer Contra Costa County Supporting Mike Barbanica for Supervisor 2024, Sponsored by Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriff’s Association, ID #1347607.” In addition, no IE committee supporting Hernández-Thorpe’s re-election could be found in a search on the City Clerk’s or California Secretary of State’s campaign reporting websites.
Political Consultant Who Handled IE Supporting Barbanica’s Home Raided by FBI
Last month, according to news reports, Mary Jo Rossi, a longtime political consultant in Contra Costa County, whose company, Rossi Communications, was paid by the IE committee of the Deputy Sheriff’s Association supporting Barbanica, had her home raided by the FBI.
Laura Stephens of Stephen Company, the treasurer for the committee confirmed Rossi was its paid consultant. But whether the raid was related to the investigation into the alleged bribery is unclear.
Sansons Have History of Serving the Community
Dave Sanson, and his wife Lori, have a history of giving back to the communities in which DeNova has done business, and founded the Yellow Roof Foundation to provide low-income housing to facilitate their efforts. The organization helped open a new home development with four rentals in Oakley in December and is pursuing another, 143-unit housing project, which will include six affordable rental units, located between E. 18th Street and Wilbur Avenue on the north side of Antioch.
The Sansons are most likely best known to the public for their 2004 work on the ABC-TV “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition” project in which they led a team of 1,200 volunteers “to tear down and rebuild a two-story home in Martinez. It was done for a 17-year-old “teen, who suffers from a rare degenerative disorder, had been forced to move out of her home because her fragile immune system would not tolerate its mold issues.”
According to Builder Magazine, the pair received the 2017 Hearthstone BUILDER Humanitarian Award.
Dave and Trent serve on the foundation’s board of directors.
Dotted red outline shows project location and monument sign located at entrance (inset). Source: City of Antioch
Majority of parcel that’s remained vacant for 20 years finally being developed, just not as originally envisioned
By Allen D. Payton
Starting their regular session an unusual 55 minutes late, the Antioch City Council met on Tuesday, March 25, 2025, and approved the new Lone Tree Retail Project on an unusual 3-2 split vote with Councilmembers Don Freitas and Monica Wilson joining in opposition.
The meeting began with a closed-door meeting at 6:00 p.m. before the regular session began at 7:55 p.m.
“We had a closed session before this. So, here we are ready to go,” Mayor Ron Bernal explained for the delay.
Acting City Attorney Derek Cole reported out from Closed Session saying, the Council met to discuss three items. The first was an employee evaluation. No reportable action. Second was conference with real property negotiators on the Sycamore Square police substation. The council gave direction to its negotiators. No reportable action. Third, was a “Qui Tam” including several agencies. No reportable action was taken, he stated.
Tenants and locations for the approved Lone Tree Retail project. Source: City of Antioch
Lone Tree Retail Project Approved on Split Vote The Lone Tree Retail project on three parcels totaling 3.22 acres next to the In-Shape Fitness health club at 4099 Lone Tree Way, is part of an 18-acre Master Planned Development, named Antioch Town Center, that had previously been approved in 2004, when Freitas was Mayor, for fitness, grocery and hard and soft retail uses. The health club was built in 2007, but the rest of the site has remained undeveloped.
Following council discussion with both Freitas and Wilson expressing their concerns that the project didn’t fit with what they had envisioned for the site, the Council voted 3-2 on Tuesday night to approve the project.
According to the City staff report, the new project consists of three buildings: a car wash, fast casual restaurant (aka Quick Service Restaurant or QSR), and combination, fast casual restaurant and retail building, along with associated site improvements Tenants with signed leases include Mister Car Wash, Habit Burger & Grill, Chipotle and to be determined retail. It will also include an adjacent multi-family residential project on the nine acres behind the project.
A representative of the project applicant, Architecture Plus, Inc. of Modesto, Paul Rothbard, former CEO and owner of In-Shape Health Clubs, said the larger restaurants suggested by members of the public won’t work at that location as those types of restaurants want freeway visibility.
At the March 11th meeting, he said they also had spoken with multiple grocery stores, but none were interested.
Street view renderings show the three retail project buildings with the future multi-family housing behind. Source: City of Antioch
“The rear nine acres are in contract with a developer, a local, Central Valley, to build a residential complex,” Rothbard said. “They’re ready to go…in Q3 of this year.” His father and partner on the project, Morton, was also in attendance at the meeting.
The son said they’re hoping to be under construction with the retail project by this August and have it completed by next July.
Rothbard also mentioned that the Chipotle will have a drive-through for picking up orders made on the app.
The Council then heard opposition from three members of the community during their March 11th meeting, with the main concerns being the fast food uses, no grocery store and no affordable housing included in the adjacent multi-family residential development.
Brian Heron of Fresno-based Commercial Retail Associates, who has been working on the property with the Rothbards since 2005, responded to those concerns, saying, “Under the previous PD..7,000 square-foot, sit down, in-house restaurants were suggested. Back then, we had agreed to get those 7,000 square-foot restaurants. Since COVID, it’s a whole new world. By and large those are obsolete concepts and…not willing to come to this location. And we have tried…many and many a time.”
The brands are “in demand in your community,” he added.
“We have tried getting all the grocers,” Heron continued. “We’ve spoken to Sprouts…to Nugget…from big to small. We went from Food 4 Less, down. We’ve tried Amazon. There isn’t a grocer for this site. We went into the next phase of that development, anchor…in 2008, 2009. The market shifted. Once again, change.”
During Council discussion, Freitas spoke first saying he was “very surprised”, “disappointed” and “very, very saddened.”
“We had a very, very grandiose view of this particular development…and I embraced it,” he continued. “I’m conflicted…because the world has changed, and we all are aware of that.” Mayor Pro Tem and District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha asked, “Are we really in a position that we can turn away business and revenue?”
District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker then said, “What the opponents are saying is ‘we don’t want this, bring us something else.’ But this is not our property. We’re talking to the actual owners who are trying to develop it because they lost money on it for 20 years for not being able to get a project completed.”
But then she switched things up and said, “My recommendation was to sell it to someone who wanted to develop more housing.”
Mayor Ron Bernal spoke next saying, “I was also surprised, not at the uses, but the way they’re oriented.” He asked if staff if there was an attempt to place the drive-through on the back side of the building. When you’re looking at 30 cars sitting up there with marginal landscaping, that’s a whole different looking project to me.
City of Antioch Associate Planner Nathan Tinclair responded saying, “One of the things we have to look at on this parcel is it’s already partially developed. There’s already this main entrance drive with the main, kind of circle with the access points to the adjacent parcels.”
He then shared his concerns with the project being presented to council “with a couple days’ notice to look at it on really tiny sets of plans” as well as landscaping, since “Lone Tree is lower and the pads, higher.”
At Freitas’ urging, the council voted 5-0 to continue the item until their meeting last night, March 25th.
A noise study was completed to confirm that noise generated by the new project does not create a significant impact, in excess of the noise levels permitted in the City of Antioch General Plan.
According to Tinclair, the Planning Commission at their February 19, 2025 meeting, with two members (Robert Martin and Christian Hills) absent and one vacancy, voted 4-0 to approve the Addendum to the Adopted Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. All four members, Chair Kevin Riley, Vice-Chair Seth Webber, and Commissioners Jennifer Perez and Cortney Jones, voted in favor.
The IS/MND was approved by the City Council in 2005. But the motion to adopt the Final Development Plan, Use Permit and Design Review failed on a 3-1 vote, with Webber voting no, as motions require four “yes” votes to pass.
Nevertheless, on Tuesday, the Council majority of Bernal, Rocha and Torres-Walker approved all four requirements for development of the project, while Freitas and Wilson voted “No”.
Depending on tier and zone Lone Tree Retail Project next to In-Shape Also, creating Sycamore police substation; will study budget
By Allen D. Payton
It will cost you more to take a shower, brush your teeth, do the dishes and laundry, water your yard and flush the toilet if the Antioch City Council approves significant water rate increases during their meeting tonight, Tuesday, March 11, 2025. The mayor and council members will consider raising rates for the first time since 2019, by 45 to 93 percent for different tiers and zones over the next three years. But before the vote the council will hear from members of the public.
They will also consider leasing space in the Sycamore Square shopping center for a Police Substation during a 5:00 p.m. Closed Session and discuss the 2025-27 budget at 6:00 p.m. During the regular session beginning at 7:00 p.m., the Council will also discuss the creation of a Homeless/Unhoused Ad Hoc Committee from the Councilmembers’ 90-Day Request List. Finally, the Council will consider approving the Lone Tree Retail Project next to the In-Shape Fitness health club.
Source: City of Antioch
Proposed Water Rate Increases Under Item 5 on their regular meeting agenda, the Council will hold a public hearing to consider annual water rate increases through July 1, 2028, keeping the current tiered structure. If approved, Non-Single Family Zone 1 rates would be raised from $4.44 to $6.42 per hundred cubic feet (HCU), a 44.6% increase and Zone IV would increase 82.5% from $4.86 to $8.87.
All eight tiers and zones for Single-Family residential rates would also be affected with Tier 2 Zone I given the lowest increase of 45.6%, from $6.22 to $9.06 per HCU. If approved, Tier 1 Zone IV would experience the greatest rate increase of 93%, from $4.20 to $8.11 per HCU over the three years.
Monthly Meter Service for single-family residential customers would also rise from $24.40 to $35.40, a 45% increase.
It will be the first water rate increase in the city since 2019. The first rate increases will begin May 1, 2025.
Lone Tree Retail Project location map. Source: City of Antioch
Lone Tree Retail Project Development Under Item 6, the Council will consider approving the Final Development Plan, Use Permit and Design Review for development of the Lone Tree Retail project. The location is next to the In-Shape Fitness health club at 4099 Lone Tree Way, and will consist of a Mister Car Wash, Habit Burger & Grill and Chipotle or to be determined retail on 3.22 acres.
Meeting & Public Comments Details Those in attendance at the meeting can speak during general Public Comments on items not on the agenda at the beginning of the meeting until 7:30 p.m. and again at the end of the meeting. They can also speak on any agendized item for up to three minutes except for public hearings, during which they can speak for up to five minutes.
The meetings are held in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 200 H Street, in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown or can be viewed via livestream on the City’s website or on Comcast local access cable Channel 24 of AT&T U-verse Channel 99.
Albers Ranch proposed 294-home project Land Use Map. Source: City of Antioch
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.
