The body of missing Antioch swimmer Edgielyn Torrente, seen in photos on her Facebook pages on Feb. 27, 2023, and Nov. 9, 2022, has been located.
46-year-old Edgielyn Torrente located Sunday morning about one mile west of where she went missing on September 23rd; family notified
By Lt. Michael Mellone, Antioch Police Field Services Bureau
ANTIOCH, Calif. – Edgielyn “Lynn” Torrente, 46, who went missing while swimming near Smith’s Landing Seafood Grill in Antioch on September 23, 2026, was found deceased in the San Joaquin River on Sunday, September 27, 2026.
Her family has been notified, and this update was held until that notification was complete.
The Antioch Police Department extends its sincere condolences to her family and friends.
RECOVERY
At about 7:06 a.m. on September 27, 2026, officers responded to multiple calls reporting a person in the water west of Smith’s Landing. She was located about one mile farther west. The Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office Marine Patrol and the Pittsburg Police Department recovered her from the water. The Sheriff’s Office Coroner’s Division responded and took custody.
The Coroner’s Division will determine the cause and manner of death. No foul play is suspected.
BACKGROUND
As previously reported, on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, at 6:12 p.m., officers responded to reports of two women in distress in the water behind Smith’s Landing Seafood Grill. The women had been swimming when a strong current pulled them from shore. Officer Molina reached one of the women, Farrah Moore, on a personal watercraft and brought her to safety.
According to his mother, Judy Dossey, “The private citizen on scene who was operating the jet ski is Jeff Lewis, an Antioch resident. Mr. Lewis also assisted in the rescue of the swimmer in distress.”
Antioch resident Jeff Lewis assists Officer Molina on a jet ski. Video screenshots source: Antioch PD
The U.S. Coast Guard, the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, and the Sheriff’s Office Air Support Unit joined APD in water and aerial searches for Torrente.
Lt. Cesar Franco said it was his understanding the two women were homeless. According to a post on the Homelessness in Antioch & Community Connection Facebook page, local homeless advocate, Nichole Gardner, wrote on the day she was rescued, “Farrah is out of the hospital and is back downtown.” She also shared that Torrente went by “Lynn”.
The Antioch Police Department thanks each of these agencies, the Pittsburg Police Department, and the community members who called 911. CASE NO. 26-9135
Both believed to be homeless; U.S. Coast Guard, Con Fire, Contra Costa County Sheriff Air Support Unit assist
By Lt. Franco Cesar, Antioch Police Department
ANTIOCH, Calif. – On September 23, 2026, at 6:12 p.m., Antioch Police Department officers responded to a report of two adult women in distress and drowning in the water near the rear of Smith’s Landing Seafood Grill restaurant by the Antioch Marina.
Upon arrival, Officer Molina immediately entered the water aboard a personal watercraft (jet ski) and successfully reached and rescued one of the women, who had been caught in the strong current.
Screenshot of Con Fire incident report of Water Rescue in Antioch Wednesday night. Source: PulsePoint
A coordinated, multi-agency search was immediately initiated for the second 54-year-old woman. The United States Coast Guard, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CONFIRE), and Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office Air Support Unit assisted with extensive water and aerial searches of the area. As of this time, the second woman has not been located.
The preliminary investigation indicates no foul play is suspected. The two women were swimming when they were caught in the strong current. We are in the process of confirming the identity of the missing swimmer.
According to a video message by local homeless advocate Nichole Gardner posted on the Homelessness in Antioch & Community Connection Facebook page, the one rescued is named Farrah and the woman missing is named Lynn. “Our friend, Farrah is one of the women who fell in and they found her. But they could not find our friend, Lynn. We were out there at 6:30 when all of this was going on.”
When asked for the women’s ages, Lt. Franco said, “The information is preliminary for now. We expect to update the information later. I believe the one who is missing is 54 years old. But we need to interview the woman who was rescued.”
Asked if they are homeless, he said, “That’s our understanding and what people are saying.”
9/24/26 UPDATE 1: According to a KTVU FOX2 news report, “The woman who was rescued was identified by a friend as Farrah Moore. She was transported to the hospital for her injuries. Moore’s friend said she is OK and suffered a cut to her leg” and the identity of the missing swimmer is “46-year-old Edgielyn Torrente.”
Antioch resident Jeff Lewis assists Officer Molina on a jet ski in the search. Video screenshots source: Antioch PD
9/25/26 UPDATE 2: According to his mother, Judy Dossey, “The private citizen on scene who was operating the jet ski is Jeff Lewis, an Antioch resident. Mr. Lewis also assisted in the rescue of the swimmer in distress.”
Asked for any updates regarding locating the missing woman Captain Gary Lowther responded, “the status of the outstanding citizen is unknown.”
The Antioch Police Department thanks the United States Coast Guard, CONFIRE, and the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office for their rapid response and continued assistance with the search.
Additional updates will be provided as more information becomes available. Anyone with information regarding this incident is encouraged to contact the Antioch Police Department. Case No.: 26-9135
Stand Up on the Delta by local non-profit connects U.S. veterans with community and critical services like housing and jobs
By Ella Sogomonian
Antioch, CA –Delta Veterans Group continues its mission to serve those who served our country. The local non-profit is inviting U.S. veterans on Friday, Sept.11 to the VFW Post 6435 in Antioch for the inaugural “Stand Up on the Delta”. This one-day event (video here) connects vets with medical treatment, housing, jobs, as well as mental health and drug counseling. In addition to these critical services, the event builds a sense of camaraderie for veterans who have a hard time creating a sense of community after they end their military service. DVG partners with East Bay Regional parks to take vets and their families fishing on the Delta shores. They will provide a backpack, collapsible fishing pole, tackle and lunch will be catered. Competitions, such as farthest cast, will also take place. There is a 50 veteran limit for the fishing experience.
“As a vet myself I understand how critical it is to extend a helping hand and create a welcoming space,” said J.R. Wilson, Founder of Delta Veterans Group. “Veterans serve their country and community so we give them a new mission to serve the community and these events bring them together to make that happen.”
Since 2015, the non-profit has helped more than thousands of veterans by finding permanent housing, serving over 23,000 meals, providing half-a-million-dollars in dental care, and sleeping bags.
Who: U.S. military veterans and their families
What: Stand Up on the Delta resource event
When: Friday, Sept. 11 from 8 a.m. – 3 p.m.
Where: TWO LOCATIONS: Resource fair at VFW Post 6435, 815 Fulton Shipyard Road Antioch, CA 94509 & fishing experience at Antioch/Oakley Regional Shoreline Pier at Bridgehead Road at Wilbur Avenue in Antioch, CA 94509
More than enough for both the Homekey+ program and Rivertown Square project
“We need to be fiscally prudent by closely monitoring expenses…and minimize General Fund subsidies to high-cost operations, such as the golf course and water park.” – then-City Manager Ron Bernal in 2017-19 Budget message
This past fiscal year, the water park received over $1.6 million to subsidize its operations, and the budget allows for $1.55 million in this fiscal year. In addition, the golf course receives almost $500,000 in debt service and water costs.
According to the City’s Adopted Fiscal Year 2026-27 Budget, “Parks and Recreation provides the City’s residents recreational, preschool, social and meeting space within the community. Recreation Programs are accounted for in the Recreation Special Revenue Fund. The Recreation Support division within the General Fund provides a subsidy to this fund to support operations.”
The General Fund budget shows Recreation Services Support (Recreation Department) receiving $4,812,031, a 12% decrease from the $5,479,935 in the Revised 2025-26 Budget. Of that amount, Recreation Services was approved to receive $1,937,164 from the City’s Measure W one-cent sales tax or 9.7% of the total revenue of over $20 million from that source. The amount makes up 40% of the total budget for the Recreation Department.
Antioch Water Park Subsidy
According to the Fiscal Year 2026-27 City Budget, the Antioch Water Park will receive $1,552,918 from the General Fund and Child Care Fund, of which $87,500 is from the latter, a 5% reduction from the subsidy of $1,627,359 in the Revised 2025-26 Fiscal Year Budget. That totals 60 percent of the water park’s revenue with the difference generated by Current Service Charges, which includes gate fees to enter the park and $111,000 in concession sales from Gator Grill and Allie’s Oasis.
According to Parks & Recreation Director Shahad Wright, “From the last supervisor report, we had over 30,000 guests but there is no breakdown for kids or adult that I can currently pull.”
Lone Tree Golf & Event Center Subsidy
Although this and last year’s City Budgets do not mention the Lone Tree Golf & Event Center (LTGEC), City Finance Director Dawn Merchant shared, “One of the transfers out to the 2015A debt service fund ($345,518 in FY26/27) is for that debt. The General Fund also pays for water at the golf course when they utilize City water (the Golf Course pays Delta Diablo directly for any irrigation water through them). We budget $150K per year, but the amount really fluctuates.”
Of the $345,518 amount, $343,500 will be used this year to pay the debt for improvements to the golf course and expansion of the event center in 2002. It’s shown in the budget as Antioch Public Financing Authority Debt Service Fund 410 (see page 45) and after this fiscal year’s payment, “the ABAG (Association of Bay Area Governments) portion of the debt will be $1,250,000 at 6/30/27 principal and $343,500 interest outstanding. The debt schedule is on page 316 of the budget,” she added.
Over 53,000 Rounds of Golf in FY25-26
According to Wright’s Lone Tree Golf Course Annual Operations Update for Fiscal Year 2025-26 to the Antioch City Council’s Committee for the Lone Tree Golf Course consisting of Mayor Ron Bernal and District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson, there were 53,079 rounds of golf played between July 1, 2025, and June 30, 2026. (COG means Cost of Goods)
The report also shows total revenue for the year of $6,600,248 with $3,091,121 from golf, of which $570,678 was generated by the driving range, and $3,509,127 from food and beverages at the Event Center, which includes Champions Bar & Grill and the banquet facility.
Expenses include Cost of Golf at $1,137,587 and Operational at $5,189,024 for Net Income of $331,796. However, as the report points out there is, “No Capital Expense Deducted” from the total included. That would be the $345,518 for debt service mentioned above. So, the LTG&EC actually experienced a net loss of $13,722. But the $331,796 remains within the facility’s budget and is not used to reimburse the City’s General Fund.
Basically, the General Fund is providing a subsidy of over $9.00 per round of golf to those who enjoy playing the sport in Antioch.
Golf & Event Center Previously Mentioned in City Budgets
The LTG&EC was mentioned in the 2014-15 and 2015-17 Budgets, twice on page 243. That reads:
“ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS (ABAG) 2001 LEASE REVENUE BONDS (411)
“In July 2001, ABAG issued $6,300,000 of Lease Revenue Bonds to refund the outstanding ABAG XXV Irrigation Project Lease and to finance the construction of a new clubhouse at the Lone Tree Golf Course. The Lone Tree Golf Course reimburses the City for all debt service and other expenditures of the fund. All construction funds have been drawn down, and the final debt service payment will be made in July 2031.”
The same message on that same page was included in the FY2015-17 Budget.
Golf Course & Event Center No Longer Reimburses General Fund, Debt No Longer Mentioned in Budgets
But the debt for the LTGC/LTG&EC was no longer mentioned and the golf course only referred to twice in the FY2017-19 Adopted Budget. On Page iii of then-City Manager Ron Bernal’s budget message it reads, “We need to be fiscally prudent by closely monitoring expenses…and minimize General Fund subsidies to high-cost operations, such as the golf course and water park.”
Then on the Supplemental Information page 295 a note at the bottom reads, “ABAG 2001 Portion – Debt payments reimbursed by Antioch Public Golf Corporation.” The same note was provided on the same page of the FY2019-21 Budget. But it was no longer included as of the FY2021-23 Budget.
Merchant was asked if that is because the debt payments have no longer been reimbursed by the Golf Corporation as of FY2022.
She responded, “You are correct that the reference was removed once the Golf Course stopped reimbursing the City. The debt service payments show in the 2015A Lease Revenue Refunding bonds debt service fund. The transfer out in the General Fund is to move money to that debt service fund for payment of the debt service.”
“As you can see from the report Shahad prepared that you provided, the City’s agreement with the Golf Course only requires that they pay us a small annual fee that is escalated by CPI,” she continued. “Many years ago, due to financial stress at the Golf Course, City council agreed to take on the burden of the debt service within the General Fund and not seek reimbursement from the Golf Course for debt service, and thus the current agreement in place.”
Merchant also shared, “The expenses related to the Golf Course were discussed at the (Council’s) budget meetings held on April 21st and May 5th.”
More Questions for Merchant
Merchant was also asked since there are expenses for the Golf & Event Center from the General Fund, why isn’t it mentioned anywhere in the budget? Shouldn’t it be for full transparency to the public?
What I see is on page 306 of the Adopted Budget, entitled, “APFA 2015A LEASE REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS (410) (Portion related to refunding 2001 ABAG bonds)” it reads, “In February 2015, Antioch Public Financing Authority (APFA) Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds were issued to refinance the APFA 2002 A&B Lease Revenue Bonds and the ABAG 2001A Lease Revenue Bonds. The APFA leases the police facility and animal shelter to the City under a site and facility lease and the base rental payments made by the City represent the debt service on the new bonds. This fund accounts for the portion related to the ABAG bonds and debt service is paid by the General Fund. Final debt service is May 2031.”
Then on page 307, entitled, “APFA 2015A LEASE REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS (417) (Portion related to refunding APFA 2002 A&B Lease Revenue Bonds)” it reads something very similar: “In February 2015, Antioch Public Financing Authority (APFA) Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds were issued to refinance the APFA 2002 A&B Lease Revenue Bonds and the ABAG 2001A Lease Revenue Bonds. The APFA leases the police facility and animal shelter to the City under a site and facility lease and the base rental payments made by the City represent the debt service on the new bonds. This fund accounts for the portion related to the 2002 A&B bonds and debt service is reimbursed by Successor Agency to the Antioch Development Agency. Final debt service is May 2032.”
So, if all the money shown on page 306, $345,518, is spent for the Golf & Event Center debt, shouldn’t the information in the chart on that page be about the Golf & Event Center not about the police facility and animal shelter?
Also, on page 45, entitled, “Transfers By Fund”, I think it would be best that under Antioch Public Financing Authority Debt Service Fund 417 it shows “Police Facility and Animal Shelter” and under Fund 410 it shows, “Lone Tree Golf & Event Center” for full transparency to the public (and media).
Merchant Explains Debt for Golf Course, Police Facility & Animal Shelter Combined When Refinanced
In response, Merchant wrote, “The reason on page 306 (and 307) it references the police and animal shelter is because when the ABAG bonds were refinanced with the 2015A lease revenue bonds, to secure the bonds, the Antioch Public Finance Authority entered into a lease agreement with the City for the Police and Animal Shelter essentially being the security for the bonds thus providing a ‘lease payment’ as debt service for the bonds. The Golf Course provides no security for payment of the bonds.”
“I note your comment about the transfers schedule,” she added. “The titles on page 45 represent the actual fund names in the City’s general ledger accounting system, as do all the transfers listed on the schedule.”
Conclusion – It All Comes Down to Priorities
During a recent council meeting on the Homekey+ program, a resident suggested the Golf Course should raise rounds by just $5.00. If they did, that would generate another $265,000 per year, which, along with the current net revenue, would be enough to cover the costs of water and the debt payment.
In addition, while I was a council member when the water park first opened, I suggested contracting out the operations to a private company. I called one in Sacramento. They said they were interested but were in the process of opening Water World (now Six Flags Hurricane Harbor) in Concord at the time. Perhaps, another private company might be interested, now. All it takes is a phone call to start the process. If it were contracted out, that would eliminate the $1.5 million annual General Fund subsidy.
Combine that amount with requiring the Golf Course Board to reimburse the City for the cost of both the water and bond debt payment for a total of almost $500,000, and Antioch’s General Fund would enjoy almost an extra $2 million per year. That’s more than enough to cover the $1.2 million annually for the Homekey+ program and to cover the estimated $250,000 annual maintenance costs of the Rivertown Square project on the former Beede Lumber Company lot in downtown.
It all comes down to priorities. The Council can continue to subsidize the recreation of some – who don’t all live, here which was an argument about not funding the Homekey+ program – or house some of our homeless residents, reducing their impact on our businesses, police department, Code Enforcement and City budget, and add a new, long-planned park and event center in the City’s historic downtown.
I believe it’s time Mayor Bernal and the rest of the council members heed his message from when he was city manager and, of less importance, ensure the debt for the golf and event center be clearly listed in each year’s budgets for full transparency to the public.
Takes action with Torres-Walker absent who was not allowed to attend via Zoom due to apparent staff mistake
“To say there’s no plan is wrong. We are not doing nothing.” – Mayor Bernal
By Allen D. Payton
Following multiple meetings on the matter, the City being awarded nearly $35 million in state Homekey+ grant funds and voting to approve the purchase and conversion of the hotel for the program, during their meeting on Tuesday, July 28, 2026, the Antioch City Council voted 3-1, to reject the funding and withdraw from the project. The funds would have been used to convert the 123-room Antioch Inn & Suites to 84 units of permanent supportive housing for veterans and homeless residents from Antioch and throughout the county. But it would have required a significant financial commitment from the City for five to 15 years which the mayor and two councilmen said Antioch can’t afford following two years of budget cuts and future deficits looming on the horizon.
District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson was the lone vote against the motion and Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker, in whose District 1 the project would have been located, was absent and unable to attend via Zoom due to an apparent staff mistake.
A new state law allows council member participation and public comments via Zoom which requires council members to submit information prior to the meeting. Earlier in Tuesday night’s meeting residents said Torres-Walker had informed her fellow councilmembers and Acting City Manager Ana Cortez she would miss the meeting and sent the necessary information to participate remotely. But something happened that prevented the councilwoman from participating in the meeting. Resident Leslie May called it, “sabotage” and as a result, she and local homeless advocate Nichole Gardner called for the agenda item to be postponed so Torres-Walker could be in attendance. But that didn’t happen and the councilwoman called in later during public comments on the matter to offer her thoughts in support of the project.
The Primary Issue: City Financial Commitment
While one of the issues was that all those housed on the property would not have been from Antioch, the primary issue for the three councilmen was the City’s financial commitment. To accept the state funding, it would have required ongoing operating assistance from the City averaging up to approximately $1.2 million annually during the initial five-year period, for a total of up to an additional $6 million. Over the full fifteen-year period, the total potential City contribution could have been approximately $18.75 million, primarily from the General Fund.
On average, the state and city funds combined would total $41.75 million or about $500,000 per unit over the first five years and approximately $54.4 million or $640,000 per unit over the full 15-year period.
Competing Views Offered During Public Comments
Following a brief staff presentation on the agenda item, #7, during public comments some residents spoke against while most spoke in favor of the project.
A woman asked, “Why Antioch? Antioch is the poster child for low-income housing. There is no guarantee it will house Antioch residents. It can go on for 55 years.”
Patrick Scott said he opposed the project, “primarily for economic reasons. This project will increase the deficits. We’ve already spent more than $25 million on homeless programs and services. In spite of these services, we still face homeless in front of our businesses, on our streets and shuttered businesses.”
He spoke of growing “encampments along the railroad tracks and in downtown.”
“Neither of our neighbors to the west or the east are experiencing the problems we have,” Scott stated.
He then spoke of the City’s projected budget deficits over the next few years and the $1.2 million annual cost for the project.
Resident Leslie May said, “The place is located in District 1. Most of the people who stand and speak against it don’t live in District 1. The railroad tracks are not the responsibility of the City of Antioch. Unless you live in District 1 and have to work with the people who are unhoused…you don’t understand what it is. It is humane to give these people a clean place.” “Antioch residents will definitely have first choice,” she explained. “They reason they’re not in Pittsburg, Oakley and Brentwood is because they pushed them all here.”
“The City of Antioch is already spending $1.2 million a year to do these sweeps, so why not spend the money on this…up to $1.2 million,” she concluded.
“Why would the council even consider adopting the Homekey project in Antioch? It’s ludicrous,” said Evelyn Scott. “Especially with the current budget shortfalls.”
“Residents can come from anywhere in the county,” she continued. “You cannot continue to dip into reserves…especially when you’re taking prime properties.
Cielo Martinez spoke next saying, “I’m 29 years old. I’ve been homeless for almost seven years. I work myself. I don’t do drugs. I don’t do alcohol. I work every day. So does my husband. I can’t afford a home, right now. The rent out here is crazy.”
Rebecca B. said, while choking back tears, “I’ve been on the streets for 15 years. We need homes. A lot of us don’t want to be out here. This is not a choice. We’re not getting better. We’re getting bitter. A lot of us want to work but we can’t work. I’m diabetic. I don’t have teeth. I can’t get a job because you want to judge me by my teeth, by my face, by my dog. I want a home. How much more in life am I supposed to take? It’s not my duty, it’s not my job. It’s your job. Please, help us. We don’t want to be out there.”
Local real estate broker Mark Jordan spoke next saying, “This is an incredibly emotional discussion. However, the City of Antioch only has one option and that’s Option B. Because the contract price is not a realistic price…of $15.1 million.”
“This particular property has a 17% occupancy rate. This property uses revenue to determine value,” he explained.
“There’s no appraisal for this property to the public,” Jordan continued. He cited state government code that it requires one unless it’s a gift.
California Penal Code…section 424 makes it a felony if an elected official overpays for a property and commits waste. Protect yourself, protect the city. The property is in foreclosure. Buy it at the foreclosure price.”
A woman who referred to herself as a reverend said, “It’s not just a fiscal issue. Housing is the most essential thing you can spend your money on. I think you can find the money. There are grants you can apply for. The amount of money you are spending on homeless people already would be offset. We can’t tolerate what’s going on in the Bay Area anymore. Even wealthy, middle-class people are struggling to pay their rent. I pray you…make the right decision.”
Joey Flegel-Mishlove, Policy Manager for the Bay Area Housing Mission, said, “Starting from the human question of what it’s like to sleep in the cold, the heat or the rain. Homelessness…as elected officials it is the most important issue. It is a fiscally sound choice to enter into this contract.”
“How in a deficit can we turn down the largest grant the State of California has ever offered us?” he asked. “Partners have been offering to help us. I hope you can say, ‘we can get this done. We will get this done.”
Former Councilman Ralph Hernandez said, “The Homekey thing, I don’t think we can afford it. You’re taking…something that is income generating for the community. They pay tax monies to the city.”
“I’m not saying deny the money from the state. Is there another way that it can be used?” he asked.
“Financially, the City cannot afford it and the homeless need to understand that,” Hernandez concluded.
A woman named Pastor Phillips said, “I’m for the housing…for the people to get housed. I’m praying that God touch your heart. It’s necessary. Give them somewhere to live. All things are possible through Christ. Have a heart. Help these people then you can clean up the community.”
Resident Joe W. said, “It’s very cut and dry. If you have money coming in you can help the deficit. If you give people a place to stay you help the community. You ain’t got no worry to get a felony off this.”
As members in the audience wouldn’t quiet down at the direction of the mayor, the council took a five-minute recess. Following the break, the council then voted to extend the meeting until 11:30 p.m.
Joe W. continued his comments saying, “You literally have the money to invest in a program. It’s a fiduciary responsibility of the committee to make a sound decision. The community of District 1 is very supportive of this. The money is there. You also need to look inside yourself. The city council is supposed to solve problem. You have wasted $25 million trying to move it away. Basically, you have a decision to invest in your people.”
Another speaker was Ankit Panchal who formerly managed and works with the owners of the hotel said, “Let’s clarify some of the false narratives. There was an appraisal that was done by the City in 2025. Cost to build a room? $300,000 for a brand, new hotel room. So, this is a bargain. This project was conditionally approved and signed by the City. If the City pulls out, will it cost the city thousands or millions?”
“The City of Antioch has a golf course,” he stated offering a funding option. “40,000 rounds of golf times four is 160,000. I believe each golfer can afford $5 extra for around of golf. That’s $800,000 per year. There’s your funding, right there.”
Former Antioch School Board Trustee Diane Gibson-Gray who said, “You’re deficit spending. So, you’re living on savings. We’re going to be sued if there’s fights.”
“What happens if the operator goes out of business?” she asked. “If you want to spend $14,500 per unit, spend it here in Antioch. I’m sure there’s some good things you could do with that money. “
Torres-Walker spoke via Zoom as a resident saying, “Wow. Tonight, has been very interesting. We have a city that is divided on a moral issue. We have months if not years to address this issue. The city invested in Opportunity Village…in clearing encampments. You have a large moral dilemma.”
She spoke of the City not having a strategy for economic development or staffing.
“I don’t know what the solution is, tonight.” Torres-Walker continued. “If I was there tonight and had the opportunity to vote, I would vote to move forward.”
Opportunity should live here in Antioch for everybody,” she stated.
“Whatever decision you make tonight…think about me and my neighbors who have to live with them every day. Support Homekey,” she concluded.
The council again voted to extend the meeting, this time for another hour until 12:30 AM. It passed 4-0.
All other public comments were in favor of the project.
Council Questions, Discussion and Decision
District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha was first to speak saying, “When this process started, I supported this application….because of the significant dollars from the state coming to our city for permanent, supportive housing.”
He spoke of the federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds that help keep people in their homes.
“I thought the $34.9 million would come to the City to offset our costs. But in time I learned that would go to the property for rehabilitation,” he continued.
“There’s no disagreement to do what we can to help our neighbors, the unhoused community,” Rocha stated. “What I think about is being a steward of taxpayer dollars.”
“I was thinking 84 beds, that would be about a third of our homeless. But the…system has a wait list throughout the county. It’s a regional problem, not just here in Antioch,” he shared. “We’re not in a position to take on a long-term commitment of taxpayer dollars,”
“What I’ve heard is partnering with neighboring communities. But that hasn’t transpired.”
“What I’m hearing from residents in District 2 and beyond, is do something with funding…but when it comes down to taxpayer dollars, that’s the part I’m struggling with.
“I don’t see money coming in to offset the deficits next year and the years that follow,” he concluded.
District 3 Councilman Don Freitas spoke next saying, “There isn’t a simple solution to many of the problems and questions asked tonight. When the council did decide to go forward it was based on the information we had at that time. We thought the information was complete and comprehensive. I voted for it. Although, unfortunately, afterwards a lot of questions came up and more and more, without answers. Our regional partners have tried to respond and give us answers.”
“A lot of speakers say, ‘it’s $35 million. What’s you’re problem? Just accept it.’ Fiscal responsibility is not a negative thing. Bankruptcy is not a wonderful thing,” he continued. “We have to make decisions individually and collectively for the 120,000 people we represent.”
“Let’s spend millions of dollars on this project knowing it’s irresponsible, knowing some future city council will have to declare bankruptcy,” Freitas stated. “We took no pleasure in cutting…and using reserves, $5 million last year, $5 million this year…and with a $15 million deficit for the next fiscal year. That’s why we’re so concerned…in August, we will begin to focus on the budget so the City will not go into bankruptcy.”
“Having receivership is not something we would welcome in this community,” he continued.
“I would love to address the homelessness in the City of Antioch. This Homekey project doesn’t guarantee it,” Freitas stated. “We can go ahead and spend $19 million for the next 15 years and the impact that we will have to spend money to oversee how we’re spending money. I just can’t understand why there’s such a fight in this community and division, and frankly, a lot of hatred…coming to us, because we want fiscal responsibility.”
“I agree with what Nichole Gardner said. ‘If not this, what are we going to do to figure this out?’ For me, Homekey+ application is not it,” he stated.
“We’re going to spend $15 million to buy a property that’s in foreclosure. Really?” the councilman asked. “We could go through all of this and not one homeless Antioch person would be helped. Not one. That is not acceptable to me. This is not the right project at the right time with the consequences. So, I believe the prudent response is the second option.”
Some in the audience then erupted into chants of “Fight, fight, fight. Housing is a human right.”
“Not helpful,” Freitas responded.
“This report, if you read it in its entirety, you’ll see it’s not a good project,” he added.
District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson said, “I need to hear from staff, particularly the city manager, why Councilwoman Torres-Walker wasn’t in this meeting tonight. She’s been the number one advocate here and we did not hear her voice, tonight and I find it very disrespectful. She let staff know over a month ago.”
“If we don’t do this, what are we going to do?” she asked “What we’re currently doing is not working. It’s a crisis on the street. We need to figure something out because people email us every day. People call us every day. They’re concerned about homeless, because they don’t want to see it. We can’t turn our backs on this population…because other cities have pushed their problems. I refuse to be a problem pusher.”
“Somebody bought that hotel and fixed it up. But we didn’t help it. We didn’t utilize it,” Wilson continued and then mentioned it’s going to be fenced in and boarded up.
“I’m probably going to be the only one to still support Homekey,” she concluded.
Mayor Ron Bernal spoke next saying, “In 2021, the city council developed and adopted policies how we’re going to help homeless. Those still stand. In December 2023…it provided specific tactics and strategies how staff was going to help homeless in the City of Antioch. We spent $500,000 to develop those plans. To say there’s no plan is wrong. We are doing aspects of that plan, with ERF (state Encampment Resolution Funds) to help 30 or 40 homeless off the streets. We are not doing nothing.”
“Let me thank staff for doing that, because it wasn’t council,” Wilson interjected.
“Yes. It was staff,” Bernal responded.
“Other cities do not use their General Fund monies for these programs,” he continued. “When this program came forward it required General Fund monies which are very precious. We faced a $54 million budget…I didn’t think we could commit $1.2 million per year. At that time, I was the only ‘no’ vote. So, I’ve been the bad guy which is fine. Because I don’t think we can add…to our deficit. That’s with 15 vacancies…deferring all of our $4 million in roof project. We have a building across the street that’s going to cost…I don’t know why we have that.”
“We as a city do not have the resources at this time to make a long-term commitment…up to $18 million in the future,” Bernal stated.
“We have a permanent housing element that with discussion with regional opportunities…I’ve reached out to other cities and there is not an appetite…for people to commit money to what people often believe is Antioch’s problem,” he shared.
“This project is not going to solve homelessness in Antioch,” Bernal continued. “This is a very expensive proposition which is going to help people, but Antioch does not have the funds.”
“My position is to rescind the Homekey funding,” he concluded.
Bernal then made the motion to rescind the prior authorization and withdraw from the project. Rocha seconded the motion and it passed 3-1 with Wilson voting against and Torres-Walker absent.
(For more background on the project see related articles here, here, here and here).
Torres-Walker Speaks During Public Comments at End of Meeting
Torres-Walker then called in again during the Public Comments at the end of the meeting.
“In advance of the meeting, I submitted all the necessary documents to participate,” she said. “It speaks to the disfunction. This is in no way a sleight to Acting City Manager Cortez. So, I don’t blame Ms. Cortez for not posting my location within 72 hours before the meeting.”
“Ms. Scott is not coming back, and we are in desperate need of quality leadership,” the councilwoman added.
Will also vote on a 3% pay raise for police officers, Street Light & Landscape Maintenance District assessments, natural gas company’s appeal to reopen pipeline and recognize 60 years of Antioch-Chichibu Sister City relationship
By Allen D. Payton
During their meeting on Tuesday night, July 28, 2026, the Antioch City Council will again discuss state funding for the Homekey+ California Supportive Housing (CSH) Mahogany Housing Project. It is expected they will vote to either accept or reject the $34.9 million grant which requires matching City funds to create 84 units of permanent supportive housing for veterans and homeless individuals in Antioch and from throughout the county.
Before the regular meeting begins at 7:00 p.m., the Council will hold a closed session at 6:00 p.m. to discuss “Initiation of Litigation”, as the agenda item is simply described.
Homekey+ CSH Mahogany Housing Project
During their meeting on June 23rd, which lasted past midnight, after receiving public comments on both sides of the issue, the Council postponed a decision on the Homekey+ funding until tomorrow night’s meeting. Then on June 29th, the Council held a study session to get their questions answered regarding the project and the funding.
According to the staff report for agenda Item 7, the Council has two options.
“Option A – Reaffirm Continued Participation and Proceed with Implementation Receive the report; acknowledge the additional due diligence conducted since the June 29, 2026, Study Session; reaffirm the City’s continued participation as a Homekey+ co applicant and the funding commitments previously approved under Resolution No. 2025/201; direct staff to continue working with the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), California Supportive Housing (CSH), and project partners to negotiate and finalize the most favorable financial and operational terms reasonably available to the City, including opportunities to reduce the City’s long-term financial commitments where feasible; and proceed with execution of the Homekey+ Standard Agreement and associated project documents consistent with the authority previously granted by the City Council.”
“Option B – Rescind Prior Authorization and Withdraw from the Project Receive the report and direct staff to rescind the City’s prior authorization under Resolution No. 2025/201, notify HCD that the City will not execute the Homekey+ Standard Agreement, and withdraw the City from continued participation as a Homekey+ co-applicant.”
Background
On average, the state and city funds for the project, combined, would total $41.75 million or about $500,000 per unit over the first five years and approximately $54.4 million or $640,000 per unit over the full 15-year period.
According to the City staff report for the June 23rd meeting, “consistent with the approved Homekey+ application and prior City Council authorization, the City identified a proposed $750,000 contribution to support acquisition and rehabilitation costs associated with the project. The proposed contribution is reflected in the City’s Five-Year Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan. Funding for this contribution is included in the proposed FY 2026/27 Housing Successor budget.
Following Council direction at their meeting on May 22, 2025, the City applied for the Homekey+ funding. “The project application assumes ongoing operating assistance averaging approximately $1.2 million annually during the initial five-year period,” for a total of an additional $6 million. “If such funding levels were maintained over the full fifteen-year period, the total potential City contribution could be approximately $18.75 million, from the General Fund.”
“The City would receive the benefit of approximately $34.9 million in State Homekey+ funding,” awarded in May 2026, “for acquisition and rehabilitation of the project. The City would assume ongoing administrative, monitoring, and compliance responsibilities associated with participation in the program.”
“While the City was a co-applicant and recipient of the award, the City has not executed the Homekey+ Standard Agreement with HCD and has not formally accepted the grant funds. Because the…Agreement has not been executed, the City currently has no contractual obligation to participate in the project. The City would not assume the reporting, compliance, monitoring, or administrative responsibilities associated with the Homekey+ Program.” However, if the Council declines the grant funds, “the City could experience reduced competitiveness for certain future discretionary housing funding opportunities.”
Council Gets Questions Answered During June 29th Study Session
During a special study session on Monday, June 29, 2026, that lasted three-and-a-half hours, the Antioch City Council asked a variety of questions of staff regarding the proposed Homekey+ California Supportive Housing (CSH) Mahogany Housing Project at the Antioch Inn & Suites, formerly Comfort Inn.
In attendance to answer questions was Jamie Schecter, Homeless Services Chief with Contra Costa Health, Housing and Homeless Services, who oversees the County’s Continuum of Care, she mentioned two other Homekey projects, Delta Landing Interim Housing Program at the former Motel 6 in Pittsburg and another in San Pablo. She also spoke of a similar upcoming project in Richmond the County is working with. Also in attendance were Richmond City Manager Shasa Curl and her Community Development Director, Lina Velasco, who has worked on that city’s Homekey project, who provided a presentation about it.
Mayor Pro Tem and District 3 Councilman Don Freitas asked, “The City of Richmond is actually the owner of this property?”
“Yes, we will own the property,” Velasco responded. “However, during the term of the ground lease, the lessee will own the improvements. They’ll be responsible for all the maintenance and the improvements.” “The wrap-around services, are they provided from City staff of Richmond or are they contracted out?” he asked.
“They’re contracted,” Velasco stated.
“How is occupancy determined?” Freitas asked.
“We cannot be limited to Richmond residents but there is a prioritization that’s considered,” she explained. “However, we’ll serve countywide.”
Mayor Ron Bernal asked if any of the funding pays for staff time and consultants. Velasco responded, “Some of the Homekey funding has predevelopment costs. However, it’s not reimbursing, like, the time I take to write an annual report and expenditure report. So, that’s part of what we’ve been absorbing outside of a loan for the rehab. But there were some early draws for the legal fees. The developer is paying for the architectural fees, the permit fees. Those costs were included in the grant award.”
“During the 55-year term of the project, will there be any funding for staff from the Homekey,” Bernal pressed further.
City Manager Curl responded, “I would say, ‘no’ and I think it’s important for the Antioch City Council to understand, our contribution of $10.3 million is an advance from the General Fund in excess of whatever was in our Housing In Lieu fund. So, as that is replenished that will pay back the City.”
“This is the first time we’ve done something of this magnitude,” Curl continued. “So, the city council has a third-party, neutral analysis that was separate from staff. In addition, the project looked at through the construction management lens, especially the change orders, especially with inflation. So, having that third party has been extremely helpful for staff working with the building official.”
“What is your program during that 55-year period for making sure the building is properly being maintained and when there is a problem…how are they handled?” Freitas asked.
“Our plan is to do annual inspections annually,” Velasco stated. “We do within our budget have a capital reserve for issues…including turnover.”
“How do you define success over a 55-year period?” Freitas then asked.
“For me…this housing type is very important and difficult to produce,” she responded. “I think making sure the property is well-maintained also, well-operated. Hoping the tenants that come in are not losing their housing or being expelled due to lease violations…making sure supportive services include tenancy sustaining services. I think those are the big things and just making sure it doesn’t become a nuisance property for the City.”
Freitas then asked about 24-hour security costs.
“So, we are talking about that. We do have that in our budget,” Velasco explained. “We may look at that overtime based on how the property is operating and the need.”
District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha asked if the occupancy would be “100% unhoused that you will be serving?”
“Yes. When we wrote our application it was for targeting the chronically homeless,” she stated. “There is a lega definition in our regulatory agreement with HCD (California Department of Housing and Community Development).”
“Is it a similar focus with individuals, youth and veterans?” Rocha asked.
“If they fit the definition,” Velasco said. “But unlike Homekey plus, you have more target definitions.”
“With your case managers is there a ratio that you have identified?” the councilman asked.
“Currently our budget is two case managers for the property,” she responded for 48 units.
“With Mahogany, it’s 100% just for those being served,” Rocha asked his fellow councilmembers. Torres-Walker nodded in agreement.
“Without those ERF funds (State Encampment Resolution Funds) and the Homekey, I think it would have been a heavy lift for the City,” Cass stated. “So, I think between that and the CDBG funds it was really important to get all of the partners to the table. For me, the price per unit is what makes it an acceptable public policy solution…because the cost per unit is less than if we were building a new unit. That was part of the rationale and because it takes so long to get a new unit online.”
Staff Answer Council Member Questions
Council members asked staff some of the outstanding questions not answered in the staff report for the agenda item.
Regarding the hotel’s current financial condition facing foreclosure, Freitas asked, “If the property owner sells the property with those debts, how is the City made whole?”
He mentioned “$400,000 or more in delinquent taxes.”
“And the water,” said Acting City Manager Ana Cortez.
“The City of Antioch is a co-applicant – said Assistant City Attorney Kevin Kundinger
“So, we’re just paying bills,” Freitas stated.
“Yes,” Kundinger replied. “I think the decisions are made collaboratively.”
Freitas asked for the breakdown of the $34.9 million in state funds.
The project developer said, “The capital award is the purchase price $27,500,00. Other costs are about $7 million.
“Approximately $700,000 is for operation and the $1.2 million from the City,” Freitas stated.
The councilman then asked about the veterans’ units.
In response to a question by Mayor Ron Bernal, the developer said there will be no senior-designated units.
Under Item 5 on the agenda, the Council will vote on the annual assessments for six Streetlighting & Landscape Districts throughout the city. They annual rates range from $8 in District 9, Zone 3, the Lone Tree Way District to as high as $331 per year in District 2-A, Zone 10, the Black Diamond Ranch units of the Citywide District, depending on the individual parcel.
The Public Works Department’s Parks & Landscape Division maintains 34 City parks and a wide variety of landscaped areas that enhance the aesthetic of our community. This includes:
City Parks and open space areas
Medians and right-of-ways
Trails and cul-de-sacs
Coordinate and oversee the annual weed abatement project
Street lighting is maintained by the Street Maintenance Division.
3% Pay Raise for Antioch Police Officers
Under Item 8, the Council will vote on the Tentative Agreement between the City of Antioch and the Antioch Police Officers’ Association that will include a 3% Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for Fiscal Year 2026-27 at a cost of $661,430 and other matters. According to the City staff report, “No COLA or additional increase to uniform allowance was including in the adopted FY26/27 budget, thus requiring a budget amendment.” The previous Tentative Agreement covered the period of Sept. 1, 2021 – Aug. 31, 2025. If the council approves the agreement, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) will be prepared to replace the agreement and require another vote by the council.
In addition to the 3% COLA, the Tentative Agreement includes the following:
Increase to four floating holidays in a calendar year.
Travel meal reimbursement increase to $25.00 for breakfast, lunch or dinner.
Lateral Police Officer and Dispatcher new hire vacation credit of one week upon employment.
Plus, increases to the uniform allowance, adjustments to benefits, retirement and vacation, sick leave and bereavement leave language defined and/or updated, as well as updates to the department’s grievance procedure.
Following the 6:00 p.m. Closed Session meeting, the regular meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. inside the Council Chambers at City Hall, 200 H Street in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown. It can be viewed livestream on the City’s website or the City’s YouTube channel.
See separate article on the Natural Gas Pipeline Encroachment Permit Application Appeal.
An Antioch Police Officer seen punching homeless woman during an encampment abatement in Waldie Plaza after she bit him, causing her hat to fly off, on July 1, 2026. Video screenshot. Source: Facing Homelessness in Antioch
By Lt. Gary Lowther #4032, Antioch Police Field Services Division
On July 1, 2026, at about 9:35 a.m., the City of Antioch conducted a scheduled encampment abatement and cleanup at Waldie Plaza, located at 206 G St. Waldie Plaza is posted with City of Antioch signage advising that the area is subject to immediate abatement pursuant to Antioch Municipal Code § 5-1 and Penal Code § 647(e).
At the same time, BNSF Railway was conducting a separate encampment abatement on its adjacent railroad right-of-way. During that operation, several individuals who had been on BNSF property moved into the Waldie Plaza area.
Antioch Police officers were on scene to provide security and support while City Code Enforcement personnel and a contracted cleanup crew carried out the abatement.
Officers are routinely assigned to these operations to ensure the safety of City employees and contracted workers. Earlier this year, a contracted cleanup employee was assaulted while conducting a similar operation.
During the July 1 cleanup, a 41-year-old woman who had been on the adjacent BNSF property confronted members of the City’s contracted cleanup crew. Officers intervened and gave the woman repeated verbal commands to move away from the cleanup crew so the operation could safely continue. Despite warnings, she refused to comply with officers’ lawful commands.
As officers arrested the woman for interfering with their duties, she bit the shoulder of one of the arresting officers. The officer responded with a physical strike to stop the assault and placed her under arrest. She was taken into custody and later booked into the Contra Costa County Detention Facility on charges of resisting, delaying, or obstructing a law enforcement officer as well as resisting a law enforcement officer with violence. See related article.
As part of protocol, information about this incident is currently or in process of being submitted to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office. Our DOJ consultant and the Antioch Police Department Internal Affairs Division have been advised of the incident. The department is in the process of assigning this incident to an independent investigator for review. As this is an active investigation, the officer involved will be placed on paid administrative leave.
Chief Vigil is releasing the following statement at this time:
“Any use of force by our officers is taken seriously. This incident will be fully reviewed under our use of force policy, state law, and our department’s current independent oversight framework.”
Anyone with information related to this incident is encouraged to contact the Antioch Police Department Dispatch Center at (925) 778-2441.
Additional information or updates will be released by the Investigations Bureau as appropriate.
