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.

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.

“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.

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 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.

See the complete Council Meeting Agenda packet.

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.

Including hiring search firm for police chief recruitment, giving authority to Planning Commission to approve tentative maps, commission appointments

Also, Climate Action and Resilience Plan, lawsuit by Antioch Police Officers Association

By Allen D. Payton

Just two weeks before a new council majority is seated, with Antioch’s new mayor and two members to be sworn in, defeated Mayor Lamar Hernández-Thorpe has placed a variety of major issues on the agenda for the current council to decide during their “lame duck” meeting on Tuesday, Nov. 26, 2024. A lame duck government meeting occurs whenever an elected board meets after its successors are elected.

Prior to the regular session at 7:00 p.m., the council will hold a Closed Session beginning at 6:00 p.m. to discuss a significant exposure to anticipated litigation and two lawsuits, one by the mother of a man who died following interactions with police and one by the Antioch Police Officers Association.

The one issue that is the responsibility of the current council is their response to the scathing report from the Civil Grand Jury, from earlier this year. But the other major issues the current mayor has placed on the agenda include hiring a search firm for recruiting a permanent police chief, giving authority to the Planning Commission to approve tentative maps, appointments of two members to the Planning Commission, one to the Parks and Recreation Commission and two to the Police Oversight Commission, all of which could be left to the new mayor and council majority to decide.

The council will also consider giving a city-owned parcel on E. 18th Street to Con Fire for a new station, directing city staff to discuss with the county the use of a 4.7-acre city-owned lot on Delta Fair Blvd. for homeless shelter, and adopting a Climate Action and Resilience Plan.

The council will also consider under item #15 potential upgrades to the Antioch Amtrak Station to help keep it from being closed or decommissioned in the next two to three years as is the current approved plan of the San Joaquins Joint Powers Authority which oversees the Amtrak service in and through Antioch. Finally, under item #15, the council will consider allocating $60,000 for a Chinese Commemoration Public Art Project in the area of Rivertown which was the City’s Chinatown in the 1800’s.

Response to Grand Jury Report

Under agenda item #1, carried over twice from previous meetings, the council will consider, “Approving an addendum to specific Findings and Recommendations identified in the Grand Jury Noncompliance letters dated October 3, 2024 in response to the Findings and Recommendations resulting from the 2023-2024 Contra Costa County Civil Grand Jury report of June 12, 2024 entitled: “Challenges Facing the City of Antioch” Addendum; and 2) Authorizing the Mayor to sign and submit it to the Contra Costa County Civil Grand Jury.”

Hiring Search Firm for Police Chief Recruitment

Under the Consent Calendar item #6L, the council will consider hiring executive search firm Bob Hall & Associates to recruit a permanent police chief. According to the city staff report, in September, the City issued a Request for Qualifications to attract qualified recruitment firms capable of conducting a nationwide search. The Human Resources Department contacted 29 firms and of those contacted, seven firms submitted applications.

On Oct. 31st, City staff and a representative from the Antioch Police Oversight Commission evaluated and ranked the applications based on the firms’ experience, proposed recruitment strategies, cost effectiveness, commitment to diversity and ability to meet the City’s timeline and goals. Two firms were identified as the closest matches to the criteria and were interviewed, during which they outlined “their strategies and processes for engaging the community and fostering trust between the Police Department and community members.” Bob Hall & Associates was ranked the highest and selected.

The Huntington Beach-based firm’s most recent police chief recruitment effort was in the City of Vallejo. According to the company’s LinkedIn profile, it’s founder and namesake, Bob Hall, passed away “on July 12, 2024, after a 5-month battle with cancer.”

UPDATE: Interim Chief Brian Addington said he was part of the decision-making process in selecting the firm and that it was Commission Chairperson Porsche Taylor as the member who participated, as well. He said he feels very confident in the search firm and that both finalists had the needed experience.

In addition, Rachel Hall, the firm’s Recruitment Manager, shared, “Bob Hall & Associates was founded in 2019 and we will be dedicating a specialized team to the Antioch Police Chief recruitment.”

Allowing Planning Commission Approval of Tentative Maps

According to the city staff report for agenda item #7, “In order to streamline Antioch’s development review process and make it more consistent with neighboring jurisdictions and the goals of the Housing Element, this proposed ordinance (“Ordinance”) amends AMC (Antioch Municipal Code) Title 9, Chapter 4, Articles 1 and 3 to assign the Planning Commission the sole authority to approve Tentative Maps as the Advisory Agency in compliance with the Subdivision Map Act, while designating the City Council to act as the Appeals Board for Tentative Map decisions and to continue approving Final Maps.”

Meeting Information

The regular meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 200 H Street in historic, downtown Rivertown. The meeting can also be seen via livestream on the City’s website or viewed on either Comcast local cable channel 24 or AT&T U-verse channel 99. See the complete agenda packet.

See separate article about the City’s Climate Action and Resilience Plan. An effort to reach Mike Rains, the attorney for the Antioch Police Officers Association for more details about their lawsuit was also unsuccessful prior to publication time.

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

Transform’s leader calls it “a tragic missed opportunity” and “major setback for our climate and transportation goals”; labels opponents who successfully challenged measure, “extremist anti-housing and anti-government activists”

“RM4 barely polled 54% before we even had a chance to open our mouths about it. Are 46% of the citizens of the Bay Area ‘extremist anti-housing and anti-government activists’?” – 20 Billion Reasons campaign opposition leader Gus Mattammal

By Allen D. Payton

In an email to supporters and an announcement this week, Jenn Guitart,Executive Director of Transform decried the removal of the $20 billion Bay Area housing measure from the November ballot and demonized those who successfully challenged it. According to polling commissioned by the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority which placed the measure on the ballot, they found that only 54% of likely voters supported the bond. That’s much lower than the 66.7% support of voters required for it to pass. (See related articles here and here)

Labeled “What It Means for Our Movement” Guitart’s email and identical announcement on the Transform’s website read:

On Wednesday morning, the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA) unanimously voted to remove Regional Measure 4 from the 2024 ballot. The measure would have raised $20 billion to alleviate the Bay Area’s housing and homelessness crisis. Unfortunately, the measure was scuttled in response to a series of eleventh-hour challenges by extremist anti-housing and anti-government activists. This is a tragic missed opportunity for voters to say yes to urgently needed affordable housing and homelessness funding.

This decision is heartbreaking for Transform and other housing advocates, and, more importantly, for the hundreds of thousands of people in our region who now must wait longer for the affordable housing and homelessness solutions Bay Area residents need and deserve.

The decision is also a major setback for our climate and transportation goals. By funding the construction of over 40,000 new affordable homes near transit, the measure would have reduced greenhouse gas emissions by over three million tons and spurred an additional five million transit trips per year.

While it is frustrating that a well-resourced group of naysayers halted progress on housing and homelessness this election, Transform and our partners will continue to build the necessary power to win big on these critical issues.

Looking Forward

All is not lost in the fight for affordable housing. Transform and our partners will be working hard to pass Prop 5 this November, which will lower the voter approval threshold for housing and public infrastructure bond measures (from a two-thirds vote) to 55%. This measure is critical to advancing future affordable housing bond measures across the state.

Beyond November, our region continues to face significant challenges, from the housing and homelessness crisis to a looming transit fiscal cliff. New regional funding measures for both transportation and affordable housing are urgently needed. Passing both measures in the coming years will take unprecedented collaboration, creativity, and courage.

Transform will play a leading role in both these efforts as we continue our work to empower communities of color, innovate solutions, and advocate for policies and funding — all with the aim of helping people thrive and averting climate disaster. And we will need supporters like you in this fight to build up the necessary resources, political will, and movement organizing to beat the anti-taxers in future election cycles.

In the meantime, get ready to vote yes on Prop 5 in November, and stay tuned for future calls to action in the fight for housing, transportation, and climate justice for our region.

Transform Executive Asked Why She Demonized Measure’s Opponents

Guitart was asked why she would demonize the opponents to the measure when it only polled at 54% support prior to it being placed on the ballot, which is much lower than the 2/3rds vote currently required and also less than the 55% threshold required for a future vote should Prop 5 pass. She was also asked if she’s claiming 46% of the public who opposed it in the poll are also “extremist anti-housing and anti-government activists” and isn’t she risking angering those who opposed the measure from the start, some of whose support will be needed for passage of a future ballot measure.

Guitart was then asked with such a low level of support, shouldn’t the measure have been revised before it was placed on the ballot in order to address some of the concerns of the opposition to ensure a better possibility of it passing.

She was also asked instead wouldn’t it be better if Transform worked with the opponents to try and find common ground or a ballot measure that will be less anathema to them for a possible future vote or to achieve her organization’s goals

Finally, Guitart was asked if she is willing to offer a public apology to the measure’s opponents, revise her public statement removing the swipes at them and tone down the divisive rhetoric.

However, in response Guitart shared that she is unable to respond right now due to a family issue but wrote, “I will pass your concerns on to our team.”

Ballot Measure Opponent Leader Responds

When asked about the swipes at the opponents made by Transform’s executive director, Gus Mattammal, the leader of the opposition campaign, 20 Billion Reasons, responded, “I have a couple of responses to that characterization:

1) 20 Billion Reasons comprised Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and Independents – the entire political spectrum. And to be clear, Democrats were about half the group.

2) Almost everyone in the group has willingly voted for tax increases before, so it’s silly to label folks as ‘anti-tax’. If someone comes to you with an idea for a pizza with pickles, sardines, and mayonnaise, and you say ‘um, no thanks!’, does that make you anti-pizza? Or are you just anti- “this particular idea for pizza”?

No one in this group is against well-constructed policies to alleviate housing unaffordability. Unfortunately, nothing about Regional Measure 4 was ‘well-constructed policy’.

3) RM4 barely polled 54% before we even had a chance to open our mouths about it, and the polling was destined to only go down from there. That means 46% of the voters were against this from the beginning. Are 46% of the citizens of the Bay Area ‘extremist anti-housing and anti-government activists’? I’m a registered Republican, and I feel like our fortunes as a party would be very different here in the Bay Area if that were true.”

About Transform

Founded in 1997 as Bay Area Transportation and Land Use Coalition (BATLUC), according to the organization’s website, Transform works “with organizations, advocates, and community members for improved transportation and housing policies and funding. Together, we can invest in climate and equity, promote innovative transportation, support transportation shifts, and address climate-related housing issues.”

The group claims to have moved “the Overton window”, which isan approach to identifying the ideas that define the spectrum of acceptability of governmental policies that says politicians can act only within the acceptable range, “steadily toward equity and climate resilience.”

They, “envision vibrant neighborhoods, transformed by excellent, sustainable mobility options and affordable housing, where those historically impacted by racist disinvestment now have power and voice.”

For more information about Transform visit www.TransFormCA.org or call (510) 740-3150.

Plus, other required mitigations for traffic impacts all paid for by developer, expected to be completed this fall

By Allen D. Payton

For those who live or work in East County and haven’t driven on Buchanan Road west of Somersville Road in Antioch, lately, you might not be aware the road is being widened to accommodate a new home development. Seeno Homes’ Tivoli at Tuscany Meadows in Pittsburg will include 917 single family homes and 365 multi-family units on 135.6 acres surrounding the Chevron property. The development was approved in 2015 and 2016 and has some residents concerned about traffic impacts. City of Pittsburg staff say all the mitigations that were proposed in the plans are being implemented. They include widening Buchanan Road to four lanes plus, turn lanes between Somersville Road in Antioch and Meadows Avenue in Pittsburg, as well as nearby affected roads and intersections.

The project will also include an internal collector street, labeled Sequoia Drive, which will connect and provide the new residents access to Somersville Road in Antioch. But the main street in the new development, labeled Tuscany Meadows Drive, will not connect to James Donlon Blvd. using Metcalf Street in Antioch until the long-planned James Donlon Blvd. extension to Kirker Pass Road in Pittsburg is completed. But that project is currently on hold, according to city staff.

City staff also shared, all the mitigations for traffic impacts are being paid for by the developer.

According to the Project Description in the Draft Environmental Impact Report, “Historically the project site was used as an above-ground crude oil tank farm owned by Chevron USA, Inc. However, the tanks and associated piping were removed from the site in 1981.”

According to the City of Pittsburg staff report for the project, the Tuscany Meadows Residential Subdivision consists of 917 single family homes and 365 multi-family residential units on an approximately 170-acre vacant site. The site consists of two parcels bounded on the north by Buchanan Road, to the east by the Contra Costa Canal and Somersville Road, to the south by the Black Diamond Estates residential development (in Antioch), and the west by the Highlands Ranch residential development (in Pittsburg). The project site is located in what was an unincorporated area of Contra Costa County, California between the City of Antioch and the City of Pittsburg limits. In 2011, the City of Pittsburg Urban Limit Line and General Plan were amended, via voter initiative, to reflect and accommodate the proposed project area in anticipation of future annexation and development.

The land was later annexed into the Pittsburg city limits.

Traffic Impacts

According to the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the project, dated July 30, 2014, the new homes “would contribute to LOS (level of service) operations exceeding the established standards at the following seven intersections: Railroad Avenue at Leland Road (Intersection #3) Buchanan Road at Harbor Street (Intersection #7) Buchanan Road at Loveridge Road (Intersection #12) Buchanan Road at Ventura Drive (Intersection #13) Buchanan Road at Tuscany Meadows Drive (Intersection #15) Buchanan Road at the Tuscany Meadows Apartments (Intersection #17) Buchanan Road at Somersville Road (Intersection #22).”

As shown in Table 5 of the TIA, entitled, “Trip Generation Calculations”, the new home development will produce almost 10,500 Average Daily Trips with most of them from the single-family homes.

Mitigation Measures

The TIA included multiple measures to mitigate the traffic impact on Buchanan Road and other nearby roads and intersections.

The report reads, “The improvements listed below are not currently included in the City’s Transportation Impact Fee Program. Prior to construction of the identified improvements the project would mitigate the above-identified impacts by either constructing the required improvements as outlined below or paying a proportionate share of the construction costs, subject to City approval. The intersection mitigations required for the project to meet the established LOS standards include the following:

Railroad Avenue at E. Leland Road – Construction of an additional southbound left-turn lane and associated widening.

Buchanan Road at Harbor Street – Widening of Buchanan Road at the intersection to allow for the construction of two through lanes on the westbound approach as well as two receiving lanes on the west side of the intersection.

Buchanan Road at Loveridge Road – Widening of Buchanan Road at the intersection to allow for the construction of two through lanes on the westbound approach as well as two receiving lanes on the west side of the intersection.

Buchanan Road at Ventura Drive – Widening of Buchanan Road at the intersection to allow for the construction of two through lanes on the eastbound approach as well as two receiving lanes on the east side of the intersection. Alternative Mitigation: Implementation of PM peak hour metering of southbound Kirker Pass Road at Pheasant Drive (the project has a significant impact in the PM peak hour only).

Buchanan Road at Tuscany Meadows Drive – Widening of Buchanan Road at the intersection to allow for the construction of two through lanes on the eastbound approach as well as two receiving lanes on the east side of the intersection. Alternative Mitigation: Relocation of control point metering to this location and implementation of PM peak hour metering of southbound Kirker Pass Road at Pheasant Drive.

Buchanan Road at the Tuscany Meadows Apartments Entrance – Widening of Buchanan Road at the intersection to allow for the construction of two through lanes on the eastbound approach as well as two receiving lanes on the east side of the intersection. Alternative Mitigation: Implementation of PM peak hour metering of southbound Kirker Pass Road at Pheasant Drive (the project has a significant impact in the PM peak hour only).

Buchanan Road at Somersville Road – Construct an additional eastbound left turn lane to allow for a dual left turn movement onto northbound Somersville Road and an additional northbound lane to allow for a dual left turn movement onto westbound Buchanan Road. Alternative Mitigation: Implementation of PM peak hour metering of southbound Kirker Pass Road at Pheasant Drive.

Beyond these intersections, the analysis indicates the project would not cause any other significant impacts to traffic operations in the area. Please note that mitigations are only proposed to address PM peak hour conditions at the signalized intersection of Buchanan Road with Tuscany Meadows Drive. No mitigations are required to address AM conditions at this intersection because, as discussed in Section 5.5, AM peak hour traffic operations on Buchanan Road are covered by a traffic management plan (TMP) which was adopted as part of the East County Action Plan.

Buchanan Road is a Route of Regional Significance

According to the 2017 East County Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance, Buchanan Road is included in the list, “Between Somersville Road and Railroad Avenue. This route serves as a conduit for traffic from East County communities to get to Kirker Pass Road and from there to Central County. Note that Buchanan Road will no longer be designated as a Route of Regional Significance once the James Donlon Boulevard extension is constructed.”

Pittsburg Public Works Director Provides Additional Details

Questions were sent to Pittsburg Community & Economic Development Director Jordan Davis, Assistant Director John Funderburg and Planning Division Senior Planner Hector Rojas, who is the lead agency contact for the project. They were asked when the widening construction is expected to be completed, how it’s being paid for, if either from the per home developer fee imposed by the East Contra Costa Regional Fee and Financing Authority (ECCRFFA) or the county’s half-cent sales tax revenue from Measure J, and which traffic mitigations were included in the approval for the project.

Finally, they were asked where things stand in the process for extending James Donlon Blvd. through the Sky Ranch II development and connecting it to Kirker Pass Road. The adjacent 163-acre, 415 home development, planned for the land south of the Tivoli at Tuscany Meadows project and west of the existing homes in Antioch, was approved in 2004 but has yet to begin construction.

Pittsburg Public Works Director John Samuelson provided the answers. He responded, “The widening of Buchanan Road is scheduled to be completed this Fall. These improvements were a condition of approval on the development and is fully funded by the developer. No ECCRFFA or Measure J funds are being used.

All mitigations identified in the traffic study were used as conditions of approval for this development project.”

James Donlon Blvd. Extension from Antioch to Kirker Pass Road on Hold

Samuelson also shared, “The James Donlon Extension Project has been put on hold. There have been some challenges with this project which has caused the City of Pittsburg to change priorities. This is still an important project for this region, and we hope to make progress once development occurs in this area.”

To learn more about new home development and other projects in the City of Pittsburg see the Community Development Department Planning division’s Current Project Pipeline at www.pittsburgca.gov/services/community-development/planning/current-project-pipeline. To learn more about the homes in the Tivoli at Tuscany Meadows development visit www.seenohomes.com/tivoli.

Removed from all nine Bay Area counties after Contra Costa attorney opposed to measure filed lawsuit claiming ballot language was slanted, forced BAHFA to correct more than $240 million error

20 Billion Reasons opposition campaign responds

By Allen D. Payton

Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA) Chair Alfredo Pedroza and Belia Ramos, president of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)’s Executive Board today, Wednesday, August 14, 2024, issued a joint statement following BAHFA’s decision this morning to remove a $20 billion general obligation bond measure for the production and preservation of affordable housing from the November 5 general election ballot in all nine Bay Area counties:

“The BAHFA Board’s decision to withdraw the affordable housing bond measure from this November’s ballot is not one that was taken lightly. The Bay Area’s housing affordability crisis has been decades in the making and is far too big for any one city or county to solve on its own. This is the reason the state Legislature established BAHFA. A robust source of funding for safe and affordable housing across our diverse, nine-county region is essential to the Bay Area’s economic and environmental health and to its residents’ quality of life. 

The decision followed the action of a group of Bay Area residents, known as Opportunity Now, who opposed the $20 billion regional housing bond measure and filed a court challenge on Thursday, Aug. 8, 2024, to Regional Measure 4’s (RM4) 75-word ballot question claiming it was slanted.

Following is the press release from the group announcing the lawsuit, entitled “BAHFA blunders on ballot language for Bay Area tax measure” and “Gets busted for wildly lowballing cost to taxpayers”:

“Talk about misinformation. The discredited Bay Area Housing Finance Authority yesterday admitted that they’d misrepresented in ballot language the annual cost to taxpayers of the mammoth bond by (hold on) more than $240 million (you read that right) per year.

“The Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA), a recently created regional agency, placed RM4 on the November 5 ballot. The unprecedented size of the bond measure has already drawn opposition. 

The 20BillionReasons.com group helped pull together ballot arguments rebutting the claims for the measure. The lawsuit asserts that the ballot question is slanted to prejudice voters to vote in favor of the measure. 

BAHFA conducted multiple polls to test various phrases in relation to the measure and picked the most popular ones. The lawsuit asserts that the ballot question contains a series of phrases that are not found in the language of the measure. The legal standard is that the ballot question must be an accurate synopsis.

Opponents’ Attorney Jason Bezis sent BAHFA a letter last Friday demanding a series of nine language changes to remove prejudicial language. Opponents assert that the true annual cost of the measure is nearly 36% higher than the amount shown in the ballot question. 

The very name of the measure is deceptive: Bay Area Affordable Plan. This measure’s taxes will make the Bay Area even less affordable. In response, BAHFA held a special meeting of its Executive Committee this morning. 

The lawsuit has already had success: The Committee adopted General Counsel Kathleen Kane’s recommendation “to correct the Ballot Question for Regional Measure 4 by deleting ‘$670,000,000’ from the Ballot Question and replacing it with ‘$910,976,423’.” No other changes to the ballot question were adopted today. 

General Counsel Kane described this as a “mathematical error”. Plaintiff Marc Joffe retorted: “How can the public trust an agency that can’t do basic arithmetic with nearly $50 billion of its taxes? Ridiculous.”

“By law, Regional Measure 4 is coordinated by the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters, so the Santa Clara County Superior Court is where this challenge was filed. The final language of the RM4 ballot question will now be determined by the court. See www.NoOnRM4.com for further information.”

“This public body, MTC in the form BAHFA, they finally acknowledged the public is not willing to support more taxes. It’s completely new to them. They’ve never recognized it before. They exist in this world in which the public is there to give them all the resources they want to monkey around with,” said David Schonbrunn, paralegal for the lawsuit said after the measure was removed from the ballot. “The worst part is MTC, when it comes to their transportation decision making, they have a dismal record on outcomes. Their outcomes are horrible. What I see them doing is it’s all about political deal making and it’s not about delivering solutions to the public.”

The BAHFA statement continued, “The BAHFA Board has always understood that it would be a steep climb to establish this source of funding. Recent developments have led the Board to conclude that the wise choice is to look ahead to another election season for a regional housing measure when there is more certainty and the voters have weighed in affirmatively on Proposition 5.

“In the meantime, BAHFA will continue to work on increasing the production of housing at all income levels, to preserve existing affordable housing, and to protect current residents from displacement. This includes maintaining, refining and expanding pilot programs such as the online Doorway Housing portal that makes it easier for prospective tenants to find and apply for affordable housing throughout the region and easier for developers and property managers to lease up their apartments; working to move thousands of planned housing units through the predevelopment pipeline; and implementing innovative programs to preserve affordable housing and prevent homelessness.

“BAHFA’s commitment to a regional approach toward solving the Bay Area’s housing affordability problems is stronger than ever. When the climb toward passage of a regional revenue measure resumes, the Board looks forward to teaming with every one of the Bay Area’s nine counties and 101 cities; and with the hundreds of other public, private and nonprofit partners who already have invested so much energy into this effort. Their work to prepare for a November bond measure, and the relationships built along the way, have laid a strong foundation for future success. Each step brings us closer to the summit.”

BAHFA is jointly governed by the ABAG’s Executive Board and by the BAHFA Board, which is comprised of the same membership as the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). BAHFA and MTC Chair Pedroza and ABAG Executive Board President Ramos both also serve as members of the Napa County Board of Supervisors. 

20 Billion Reasons Campaign Responds

In response to the withdrawal of the measure from the ballot, the opposition campaign, 20 Billion Reasons, responded with their own statement on Wednesday, August 14, 2024:

“This morning, the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA) voted to pull Regional Measure 4, the $20 billion dollar regional bond measure, off the November ballot. Gus Mattammal, President of the 20 Billion Reasons campaign to defeat the bond measure in November, hailed the move.

Said Mattammal, “This decision is a win for Bay Area taxpayers, and a win for affordable housing. To address housing affordability in a meaningful way, we have to address root causes, not soak taxpayers for billions of dollars to pay bonds that would waste two thirds of their tax money on interest and overhead while barely making a dent in the issue.”

The 20 Billion Reasons campaign brought together Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and Independents in a single campaign, a rarity in recent times, but a necessity.

“Actually, working on the root causes of the housing crisis in California – a crisis created by our legislature and the corporate interests to which they are beholden – is politically difficult. It’s much easier to simply raise taxes,” said Mattammal. “That’s why it’s so important for voters to say ‘no’ to deeply flawed proposals such as Regional Measure 4: every time we do say no, it helps create the political conditions to work on the problem in a meaningful way.”

Though Regional Measure 4 is off the ballot for November, many other expensive proposals remain on that ballot. The $20 Billion Reasons campaign team is excited to regroup and consider the best way forward to help ensure that Bay Area taxpayers are getting real solutions for the taxes they pay and that they have a real voice in what is done with their tax money.”

John Goodwin, Assistant Director of Communications, Rebecca Long, Director, Legislation & Public Affairs, Metropolitan Transportation Commission contributed to this report.