Include non-transit transportation, environment, housing and economy strategy refinements
Will impact Antioch’s BART Station and industrial areas
The Joint Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Planning Committee with the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Administrative Committee on Jan. 12, 2024 approved the revised Plan Bay Area 2050+ Draft Blueprint strategies and Growth Geographies. This action enables staff to further study the strategies’ performance in meeting critical regional goals for an affordable, connected, diverse, healthy and vibrant Bay Area for all. Staff are aiming for adoption of the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Final Blueprint in summer 2024.
Given Plan Bay Area 2050’s solid foundation of 35 strategies, the Draft Blueprint phase for Plan Bay Area 2050+ is focusing on making targeted refinements to select plan strategies. These refinements reflect Plan Bay Area 2050’s implementation progress, the post-pandemic planning context and insights gathered during engagement with the public and partners in summer 2023.
What is the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Blueprint?
The Plan Bay Area 2050+ Blueprint will integrate strategies across the four elements of the plan — the economy, the environment, housing and transportation — to create a more equitable and resilient future for all.
Beginning in summer 2023 and wrapping up in late 2024, staff will develop the Blueprint over two phases: the Draft Blueprint and the Final Blueprint. Given Plan Bay Area 2050’s solid foundation of 35 strategies, the Draft Blueprint phase for Plan Bay Area 2050+ will focus on making targeted refinements to select plan strategies.
What are Growth Geographies?
Priority Development Areas — Places nominated by local governments served by transit and planned for new homes and jobs at densities necessary to support effective transit service.
Priority Production Areas — Industrial areas of importance to the regional economy and local communities that support middle-wage jobs.
Transit-Rich Areas — Places near rail, ferry or frequent bus service that were not already identified as Priority Development Areas.
High-Resource Areas — State-identified places with well-resourced schools and access to jobs and open space.
Staff previously shared proposed Draft Blueprint strategy refinements in October and November 2023, detailing which of Plan Bay Area 2050’s 35 strategies were likely to see major, minor or no changes in Plan Bay Area 2050+. This month, the MTC and ABAG committees approved moving forward with revisions for further study and analysis, including:
Non-transit transportation strategy refinements focused on prioritizing equity considerations, adapting to tighter fiscal constraints, promoting active transportation and safety, and expanding pricing strategies;
Environment strategy refinements focused on further reducing greenhouse gas emissions and proactively adapting to climate change; and
Housing and economy strategy refinements focused on addressing pressing challenges of housing affordability, homelessness and access to opportunity.
At this time the Draft Blueprint only includes a handful of modified transportation strategies, pending the development of a fiscally constrained Transportation Project List, which will integrate recommendations from the ongoing parallel Transit 2050+ effort. The complete suite of revised transportation strategies will be integrated as part of the Final Blueprint in summer 2024.
The Joint ABAG and MTC Committee also approved targeted updates to the Growth Geographies that were adopted as part of Plan Bay Area 2050. Growth Geographies are places that Plan Bay Area prioritizes for future homes, jobs, services and amenities and serve as a component of the plan’s housing and economy elements. Specifically, draft Growth Geographies for Plan Bay Area 2050+ will include five new Priority Development Areas (PDAs) and 16 modified existing PDAs nominated by local Bay Area jurisdictions; reflect up-to-date information on transit service, natural hazards and demographics; and integrate areas subject to MTC’s revised Transit Oriented Communities Policy.
The Draft Blueprint approval comes six months after MTC and ABAG kicked off the limited and focused update to Plan Bay Area 2050. In November 2023, staff shared progress-to-date with policymakers, including findings from the first round of engagement, core planning assumptions, the draft Regional Growth Forecast, a financial needs and revenue analyses and proposed strategy refinements.
The next round of public and partner organization engagement activities, which will inform the development of the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Final Blueprint, is planned to begin in spring 2024. MTC and the ABAG Executive Board are expected to approve Final Blueprint strategies in summer 2024.
Plus, 7 other items including Wilson’s gas station moratorium, repealing city cruising ban due to new state law; presentations on homeless services, Community Response Team
By Allen D. Payton
During a special meeting Tuesday night, Jan. 30, 2024, the Antioch City Council will receive three presentations including one on Unhoused Resident Services and discuss eight items requested by council members including a possible ballot measure for infrastructure and/or programs under agenda Item 5. requested by Mayor Lamar Hernandez-Thorpe, and a moratorium on new gas stations, proposed by Mayor Pro Tem and District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson.
The meeting will begin at 6:30 p.m. and be held at the Nick Rodriguez Center, 213 F Street in Rivertown.
The other two presentations will be on the City’s Youth Services Network and on the California Violence Intervention and Prevention (CALVIP), the City’s Community Response Team and raising awareness against domestic violence.
On the gas station moratorium discussion under agenda Item. 10, city staff offers basic options that the Council could consider including: a temporary moratorium on approval of new gas stations or a ban on new gas stations. In addition, the City could consider a ban on the expansion of new pumps at existing gas stations.
The other six items requested by council members for discussion and possible placement on a future council meeting agenda for votes include the following items:
4. Discussion on the Antioch Alert System requested by District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica.
6. The Contra Costa County A3 Miles Hall Crisis Call Center requested by District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker.
According to the staff report, A3 is the county’s approach to providing behavioral health crisis services to anyone, anywhere, at anytime in the county. Annual Measure X sales tax revenue supports the center, mobile response teams and connection to follow-up care for those in crisis. A3 has grown from a pilot project in 2021 to now operating 24/7. Currently, A3 responds to about 200 calls and dispatches 30 mobile teams per week. They helped over 2,900 callers in 2022 and expect that number to grow to more than 4,500 people this year.
7. Hiring incentives for city employees requested by Hernandez-Thorpe.
8. Permits for landlords renting to family members requested by Barbanica.
9. Discussion on the City’s official poet laureate program requested by Torres-Walker.
11. Repealing the City’s ban on cruising. According to the brief description of the agenda item, staff is recommending that the City Council direct staff to prepare an ordinance to repeal the City’s local ban on cruising, set forth in Section 4-5.1009 of the Antioch Municipal Code (AMC), which is now preempted by State law effective January 1, 2024.
Cruising Now Legal in California
According to the city staff report by City Attorney Thomas L. Smith, “On October 13, 2023, Governor Newsom signed into law AB 436, which amends Section 21100 by removing subdivision (k) “Regulating cruising” from the traffic matters that local agencies may regulate. Effective January 1, 2024, cruising bans adopted by cities are no longer authorized under State law. Therefore, cruising is a legal activity within the State of California. Existing City bans are now preempted by State law.”
State Senator Steve Glazer was absent for the vote but State Assemblyman Tim Grayson, who is running for Glazer’s seat, voted for the bill.
Community Response Team Report Details
According to the Community Response Team report, since Oct. 2022, they have responded to 1,600 Dispatch calls of which they had 51 accompanied the Antioch Police Department, 573 Welfare Checks and 293 for Mental Health Related Services. In addition, most of the calls were made during the hours of 6am-11pm, with 12pm-5pm being the peak hours of conducted services.
No votes will be made during the meeting just direction to staff. See complete meeting agenda.
Source: MTC. Credit: Edmond Dantès photo via Pexels
Expected to boost Bay Area housing bond prospects; Cal Chamber opposes; requires majority of voters to approve
By Allen D. Payton
MTC/ABAG-backed Assembly Constitutional Amendment 1, which would lower the vote threshold for local special taxes and bonds to fund affordable housing, transportation, resilience and other public infrastructure projects from two-thirds to 55%, will go to voters in November 2024.
The state Legislature last month approved sending the amendment, authored by Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, to voters with the backing of the entire Bay Area legislative delegation. MTC and ABAG sent letters of support to Sacramento and MTC/ABAG legislative staff actively lobbied the bill to help get it over the finish line.
Similar bills have been proposed over the past two decades but until now none were approved by the house of origin, a hurdle that itself requires a two-thirds vote. Other supporters included Nonprofit Housing Association of Northern California, Enterprise Community Partners, the California Professional Firefighters, and individual cities and counties.
“While Bay Area voters have a long history of generously supporting taxes to fund transportation and housing improvements, measures in some parts of the region have repeatedly fallen short of the two-thirds margin,” MTC-ABAG Executive Director Andrew Fremier noted. “ACA 1 would reinstate the ability of voting majorities to address vital community needs.”
The election of ACA 1 co-author Robert Rivas to the Assembly speakership helped build momentum for the proposed amendment, as did the nonprofit housing community’s raising of $10 million to gather signatures for a citizen’s initiative if the legislature didn’t approve the amendment.
California Chamber of Commerce Opposes
The constitutional amendment is opposed by the California Chamber of Commerce. In a report by policy advocate Preston Young before it passed, he claims ACA1 would increase costs for key sectors, will erode taxpayer safeguards and would harm California workers.
Preston wrote, “This would provide increased tax authority for many local government agencies in California—not just cities and counties, but thousands of potentially overlapping special districts.
In a letter sent to legislators recently, the CalChamber pointed out that while it’s important to improve infrastructure and increase housing availability, higher property, sales and parcel taxes on working Californians run counter to the goal of making the state more affordable for all.
Businesses engaged in manufacturing, research and development, teleproduction and post-production, and agriculture face a significant sales and use tax burden in California.
The sales and use tax is supposed to be a tax on the final point of sale of a product, yet many businesses—including businesses conducting research and development, manufacturing, filming activities, and agriculture—are taxed for equipment purchases.
Taxation of business inputs for these industries leads to a pyramiding effect throughout the production process, leading to higher costs for purchases made by consumers, the CalChamber explained in its letter. To counter this pyramiding effect and incentivize business growth in the state, California offers a partial state-level sales tax exemption for purchases made by these industries. However, purchases made by these businesses are still subject to local transactions and use taxes.
Equipment purchases represent a significant portion of capital investment for existing businesses and start-ups. Tax increases promoted by ACA 1 would defeat the purpose of the state-level exemption provided by the state and make it more cost-prohibitive to conduct these business activities in California, the CalChamber warned.
ACA 1 would allow local jurisdictions to approve Bradley-Burns sales tax increases with a 55% vote of the electorate, eliminating the uniformity and certainty provided by the Bradley-Burns sales tax.
This would represent a monumental change to sales and use tax policy in the state, the CalChamber said. Unlike the transactions and use tax—which is capped at 2% per county and requires statutory authority to exceed the cap—the local 1.25% sales tax (referred to as the Bradley-Burns sales tax) is uniformly applied across the state and voters are not authorized to approve increases to the rate.
“California already has the highest state-imposed sales tax in the country, and the combined sales tax rates in some jurisdictions are among the highest in the United States,” the CalChamber said. “Allowing localities to modify their Bradley-Burns sales tax rates, without a cap on rate increases, paves the way for excessive combined sales tax rates in parts of the state—increasing costs for residents and businesses.”
More than four decades ago, prompted by years of rising taxes, Californians resoundingly approved Proposition 13 to provide a check on local governments’ taxing authority, and to ensure a greater representative voice for those who would be taxed. Proposition 13 also limits taxes on property to 1% of the property’s assessed value.
Reducing the vote threshold would diminish the people’s voice on tax increases and would erode property tax safeguards. The CalChamber pointed out that a May 2022 Public Policy Institute of California poll found that 64% of registered voters believe Proposition 13 has benefitted taxpayers, and this support reaches across nearly every major demographic.
After comparing the costs of operating in California versus other states, many employers left the state in recent years. A Hoover Institution report found that from 2018 to 2022, at least 352 companies relocated their headquarters out of California—with many businesses citing the state’s tax burden as the deciding factor in their relocation.
The relocation of these companies and their employees to lower-cost states has a major impact on state and local tax revenue, causes unemployment for workers who cannot move to the new location, and is a sign that California must find ways to be more competitive, the CalChamber stressed.
“Tax increases such as those promoted in ACA 1 would be a step in the wrong direction and would encourage more companies to move workers and investments to other states,” the CalChamber said.
Indeed, Californians are sensitive to this problem. A 2020 Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll found that 78% of voters “agreed that taxes in California were already so high that they were driving many people and businesses out of the state.”
Majority Vote Needed to Pass
According to a report by the California Globe, Article XVIII, Section 4 of the California Constitution, “requires a proposed amendment or revision to be submitted to the electors and, if approved by a majority of votes, takes effect on the fifth day after the Secretary of State files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on, but the measure may provide that it becomes operative after its effective date.”
Electric vehicle charging station examples. Source: City of Antioch
Approves contract for homeless encampment cleanup
“Gentrification only happens when filthy rich people push out people who rent,” Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker
By Allen D. Payton
During their Tuesday, August 22, 2023 meeting, for the third time, the Antioch City Council, on a 3-1-1 vote, approved the residential tenant anti-retaliation and harassment ordinance and unanimously voted to approve spending $1.2 million more for electric vehicle charging stations throughout the city for use by both the City vehicle fleet and the public. The council also voted to give a one-year extension to the multi-family housing project on Wild Horse Road and approved the contract for Homeless Encampment Cleanup.
Council Again Adopts Residential Tenant Anti-Retaliation, Harassment Ordinance
After approving it twice previously, the council again approved the anti-retaliation, harassment ordinance on a 3-1 vote with District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock voting no and District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica abstaining because he owns a property management company. The council had previously adopted the measure, but with District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson absent for the second reading, it passed on a 2-1 vote with changes. That required the item be brought back a second time for a first reading. (See related articles here and here)
“This legislation…is not the exact one we voted on weeks ago,” Thorpe stated. “No one is going to jail under this legislation. There is no provision for jail time. It doesn’t exist. There is no presumption of guilt in this legislation. Absolutely not. We have fixed that, and I think most parties are happy with that.”
“This is about the landlord’s intent if it’s in bad faith and it is, by the way, on the tenant to prove,” he added.
During another session of public comments – limited to just one minute each – on both sides of the matter, Mayor Lamar Thorpe warned members of the audience that the council meeting would end at 11 p.m. and if the council did not vote by then the item would be continued until the second meeting in September due to notification requirements for public hearings.
“Gentrification only happens when filthy rich people push out people who rent,” Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker said during council discussion.
“As I’ve said before, I agree with the ordinance but there needs to be some changes,” Ogorchock said referring to a section on single-family residences. “There was something that was talked about seniors. The seniors are safe. We added that in here. Health facilities…are in, here. They’re safe.”
She asked for a few changes.
“We can remove that language and add ‘as determined by the court’ because the court can imprison you,” Thorpe said with a laugh. He asked about language in the ordinance regarding landlords towing tenant vehicles being considered harassment.
“If you remove it in bad faith, I get that,” he said. “You are the second lawyer. The first lawyer told us something different. A landlord has a right to say, ‘this car is in violation…and I have to get it towed’. It can’t be harassment.”
“All this section is saying if you remove the vehicle…if you’re not supposed to tow the car but you do it anyway, you’re in violation of the law,” City Attorney Thomas L. Smith responded. “So, why don’t we add something to that to give you some clarification.”
“If you have a parking stall, your lease requires your vehicle to be registered…to be on the property,” Torres-Walker said. “If it’s not registered then they will tow your car. When you have a single-family home…you’re also renting the driveway. So, if my car is in the driveway how can you tow it?”
“Antioch steals cars every day,” she continued. “My car almost got towed. Is that harassment?”
“What this is saying is describing something that constitutes harassment,” Smith interjected and offered additional language. “If applicable law allows for towing the vehicle, then it’s not harassment.”
“That’s all we’re looking for,” Thorpe responded. “So, we will add that.”
“I had 10 other changes,” he continued to laughter by Torres-Walker. “I’m lying. I had a few other changes.”
“This doesn’t give ACCE or any organization to just walk onto a property,” Thorpe said about another section.
“This is more complicated,” Smith responded. “What we’re saying is the landlord shall allow the to enter and organize.”
“I just want to be clear that ACCE, if they have not been invited by a resident, they have a right to go onto an apartment complex and start organizing residents,” Thorpe shared. “This will be the last thing for me.”
“This is an important one,” Smith stated. “Here it says, ‘you won’t prohibit a tenant from organizing activities…or other political activities.’ It is a question of access. This is saying, you have to allow access, but you can provide the time and location. A right to access is a property right. But there is a question there of what is the government intent? Are we granting an accesss right? We should clarify tenants can invite you but we aren’t requiring they allow.
“Do we have to take a vote to extend the meeting,” Torres-Walker then asked.
“Yes,” Smith responded.
The council then passed a motion to extend the meeting by seven minutes on a 4-0 vote.
“Why don’t we say when hosted by a tenant?” Smith asked.
“Perfect language,” Thorpe responded who then made the motion to adopt the ordinance with the revised language.
But more wordsmithing continued to clarify the changes requested by Ogorchock and Thorpe.
Thorpe then said about the section on protecting senior residential homecare facilities, “I supported that change because I thought my colleague would support the ordinance. So, we’re striking that language.”
“That is my motion,” he stated.
The council then voted 3-1 to cheers from the audience, with Ogorchock voting against and Barbanica recusing himself. Audience members left the council chambers chanting, “this is what democracy looks like.”
Council Approves $1.2M More for Electric Vehicle Charging Stations
The council voted 5-0 to adopt a resolution approving an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2023/24 Operating Budget to increase the funding from the General Fund for the Zero Emission Vehicle Transition Project by $1,226,760 for a total amount of $1,361,814.
According to the staff presentation during the meeting, the state now requires 50% of all new cars purchased by local governments to be fully electric. If local governments are going to purchase two new vehicles, one of them has to be battery electric or fuel cell electric by state mandate, Thomas Paddon explained. “The City must act beginning next year.”
The charging stations will be available to both City vehicles and the public.
“It’s a good idea. But if 20 people have those kind of cars, then it’s not wise. I can’t afford it,” said resident Julia Emegokwae. “Elon Musk and the electric car companies should pay, not the City, not the taxpayers.”
“We’re just catering to two companies, Ford and Chevy. I just went and looked at Kias. Kia has EV cars,” another speaker said. “Other companies have EV cars and crossovers. So, I don’t know why they just want to stay on Chevy and Ford. When it’s time to buy that battery…it’s expensive every five years.”
Council Discussion & Vote
District 3 Councilman Mike Barbanica said, “you mentioned buy one regular car and buy one electric.”
“It’s a 50% procurement requirement. This is coming from CARB (California Air Resources Board,” Paddon said during the presentation. “It’s going to be an ongoing thing. All of your purchases cumulatively over the next 15 years have to be electric. Then it’s 100% after 2027. This is specifically for municipal fleets. This only applies to vehicles to heavy vehicles.”
This doesn’t apply to police Interceptors.
“If we’re only looking at F-250’s and above how many vehicles are we looking at?” Barbanica asked.
“66,” Paddon responded. “The electric vehicles will be more affordable, anyway. There are vehicles like Kia that we recommend in the light duty space.”
“The funds will come from CDC grant. It will be 25 percent cost share the city will have to come up,” he stated in response to a question by Barbanica.
“This $1.3 million is 25% of taxpayer money,” Barbanica stated.
“This is like a down payment on the infrastructure to power the entire fleet,” Paddon responded.
“The money is recommended coming out of the General Fund,” Acting Public Works Director Scott Buenting added.
“We always want to make sure we budget the money in a responsible way. So, we have to front the money. Whether we have the money or not we have to move in this direction,” Mayor Lamar Thorpe stated.
The motion to approve the additional funds for the program passed 5-0.
Gives Extension to Multi-Family Project, Approves Homeless Encampment Cleanup Contract
After passing a motion to adjourn, the council voted to reopen the meeting 4-1 with Barbanica voting against. They then passed a motion adopting the Consent Calendar except Items H and O.
On a separate vote on Item H, regarding a one-year extension of the vesting tentative map for the multi-family housing project on Wild Horse Road, Thorpe recused himself, again because his home is too close to the project.
“The motion to go union, since it’s a private project, the city doesn’t have any power to force a private landowner to go union,” Attorney Smith explained in response to a question by Barbanica.
“This was supposed to be commercial on the front of this site,” Ogorchock explained.
“All they’re asking for, here, city attorney, is an extension?” Barbanica asked.
The motion then passed 4-0-1.
The council then approved Item O awarding a Maintenance Services Agreement for On-Call Homeless Encampment Cleanup Services throughout the City to Sharjo LLC dba ServiceMaster Restoration Management for a three (3) year term from July 25, 2023, to June 30, 2026, in the amount of $1,365,000 with an option to extend two (2) additional years from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2028, in an amount of $951,360 for a total contract amount not to exceed $2,316,360 over the five (5) year period.
The council had previously approved the budget item during their July 25th meeting on a split vote of 4-0-1 with Torres-Walker voting to abstain.
“I do agree we need to support our city workers,” she stated. “We should have worked with Safe Streets that could help homeless folks. We could have spent this million and some change in a better way…a way that is a lot more sustainable that could have got people off the streets.”
The motion to approve passed 4-1 with the mayor pro tem voting against.
The council then voted again to adjourn the meeting at 11:20 p.m.
Because the discussion and vote on the anti-retaliation and harassment ordinance item ran past 11 p.m., the council continued the remaining item regarding discussion of potentially hiring retired police officers to help the department until their next meeting.
Will cost $2.3 million over five years, but keeping it in-house will cost $1.9 million; will free up 2,200 hours of staff time for other work including street repairs and maintenance
By Allen D. Payton
During their meeting on Tuesday, July 25, 2023, the Antioch City Council voted 4-0-1 to contract out the cleanup of homeless encampments on City-owned property and rights-of-way. Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker, without comment, voted to abstain. While it will cost the City budget approximately $400,000 more over five years, it will save staff time allowing them to do other priority work in the city. The outside contractor will be hired at a later date.
According to the staff report on the item, “The Public Works Department currently handles all the homeless cleanup abatement throughout the City of Antioch on City owned property and rights-of-way. Cleanup work is accomplished by work crews from the Streets Maintenance division and NPDES division. All abatement cleanups on City owned property and streets are handled by a streets crew. An NPDES work crew handles all cleanups within the City’s creeks and retention basins.
In calendar year 2022, City staff spent 2,197 labor hours performing homeless encampment cleanups. The time and resources dedicated to these cleanups prevents both Streets and NPDES work crews from completing their regularly scheduled and State mandated maintenance work. For example, the Streets Crew must defer signs and striping work as well as pothole and in house road repairs. NPDES crews must sometimes defer County mandated fire break maintenance work within the City’s creeks and State regulated storm drain and creek maintenance.
Additionally high priority sewer repairs get put on hold which could increase the City’s liability if sewers overflow in addition to potential fines from the State.”
Multiple city workers spoke in favor of the contract due to them being robbed while cleaning up, having to sort through needles, being spit on and afraid for themselves and their families to shop at the Target in Antioch and go to the store in Pittsburg, instead.
“Our experience is in sewer…in storm. We shouldn’t have to calm down the person who we’re taking their home away,” one employee said.
“We have to have PD on every site we go to. PD can’t always stay. The guys are literally getting yelled at, cursed at,” said Jeff Cook. “This contract would allow the actual professionals do the job they’re trained to do. One of the officers passed out from fentanyl exposure.”
“We can agree this is not the right department to handle the solution,” resident and homeless advocate Andrew Becker said. “These men and women shouldn’t be put in this position. But I’m wondering why other departments that deal with homeless are not here for this presentation.”
According to Acting Public Works Director Scott Buenting, the estimated cost to keep the work in-house within the department over the next five years is $1,913,443. The estimated first-year cost is $455,000 with annual increases, for a total five-year cost of $2,316,360.
Council Discussion & Approval
District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock asked about the contract. “My concerns are almost 2,200 labor hours taken away from what they were hired to do,” she said. “I would like to move forward on the outside contract as soon as possible.
She then moved approval, seconded by District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica and it passed on 4-0-1 with Torres-Walker voting to abstain.
“We were in negotiations on this last year. Just for clarification this is something we agreed to,” Mayor Lamar Thorpe said.
Personnel on four Con Fire engines and two trucks responded to a small fire at the Executive Inn on E. 18th Street in Antioch Saturday, July 8, 2023. Photo by Allen D. Payton
Executive Inn on E. 18th Street; APD, another resident help victim out of her room
By Allen D. Payton
Con Fire personnel responded to a small fire in one of the rooms at the Executive Inn on E. 18th Street Saturday afternoon, July 8, 2023. It’s the location of the City’s homeless hotel offering transitional housing.
According to Battalion 8 Chief Scott Valencia, it was “a very small fire in the bedroom. The sprinklers kept it in check. This is a normal response for a commercial fire, four engines and two trucks. One victim had burns to the hand. The cause is still under investigation.
According to Fire Marshal & Assistant Chief Chris Bachman, “the female victim in her 20’s was passed out on the bed. Antioch PD and another resident assisted the victim to get her out of the room. She was transported to UC Davis Medical Center.”
“Not only was it a sprinkler save of the room, but a sprinkler save of a life, as well,” he stated. “Because it was a change of occupancy from hotel to transitional housing, Con Fire required a sprinkler system and they retrofitted it,” Bachman explained. “Today was a great example of why the code identifies that our occupancies require sprinklers, now and how the sprinkler system saved not only the building but a life.”
Small fire at Antioch’s homeless hotel burns hand of female resident Saturday
Executive Inn on E. 18th Street
By Allen D. Payton
Con Fire personnel responded to a small fire in one of the rooms at the Executive Inn on E. 18th Street Saturday afternoon, July 8, 2023. It’s the location of the City’s homeless hotel offering transitional housing.
According to Battalion 8 Chief Scott Valencia, it was “a very small fire in the bedroom. The sprinklers kept it in check. This is a normal response for a commercial fire, four engines and two trucks. One victim had burns to the hand. The cause is still under investigation.
According to Fire Marshal & Assistant Chief Chris Bachman, “the female victim in her 20’s was passed out on the bed. Antioch PD and another resident assisted the victim to get her out of the room. She was transported to UC Davis Medical Center.”
“Not only was it a sprinkler save of the room, but a sprinkler save of a life, as well,” he stated. “Because it was a change of occupancy from hotel to transitional housing, Con Fire required a sprinkler system and they retrofitted it,” Bachman explained. “Today was a great example of why the code identifies that our occupancies require sprinklers, now and how the sprinkler system saved not only the building but a life.”
Contra Costa County Point In Time Homeless County on Jan. 25, 2023. Source: H3
95 more homeless residents than in 2020
Contra Costa County’s annual survey to document people experiencing homelessness showed a four percent increase overall in 2023 compared to 2020, according to a report released by Contra Costa Health’s Health, Housing and Homeless Services team (H3).
H3 and its community partners, including more than 200 volunteers, canvassed across the county to count the number of people living in emergency shelters or outdoors on Jan. 25, 2023 and released preliminary findings of the 2023 Point in Time count (PIT) this week.
The PIT provides a one-day snapshot of homelessness in Contra Costa. It impacts funding, includes important data and demographics, and helps inform how Contra Costa Health (CCH) can most effectively provide services to people experiencing homelessness. (See Powerpoint presentation)
The preliminary findings show that 2,372 people were without housing during that 24-hour period, including 1,653 people who were unsheltered. That is a 4% increase from the 2020 PIT, which counted 2,277 people experiencing homelessness.
“There’s no one reason why people lose their housing,” said John Gioia, Chair of the County Board of Supervisors. “We are working hard on many fronts to create more housing opportunities with supportive services, including investing $12 million per year in a newly established Housing Trust Fund. Contra Costa County is also working with other counties statewide to reform the homeless system of care in California to link funding with accountability for outcomes.”
Since 2020, bed capacity in the county increased by over 560 beds and CCH opened Delta Landing thanks to the state’s Homekey program, which added critically needed services in East County.
“This year’s PIT count shows that homelessness rates in the county are relatively stable and similar to pre-pandemic numbers,” said H3 director Christy Saxton. “This is a testament to the services we work to provide to people who are experiencing homelessness in our communities, but there is more work to be done.”
The full PIT report, expected to be completed in June, will include additional geographic and demographic data. Visit cchealth.org/h3 for more information on homeless services and resources.
Architectural renderings by Shelterwerk of micro-homes planned for Hope Village at Grace Presbyterian Church in Walnut Creek. Source: Hope Solutions
Includes tiny homes and ADU’s
By Allen D. Payton
During their meeting Tuesday night, the Antioch City Council was provided a presentation on an effort to bring tiny homes to Antioch and the two-year Partnership for the Bay’s Future Breakthrough Grant to fund the effort to get them approved in the city. The proposal includes micro-home cottages on faith owned land plus Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU’s) on privately owned residential property.
The agencies are the Multi-Faith Action Coalition (formerly Contra Costa Interfaith Housing) and the Pleasant Hill-based Hope Solutions with help from the Local Initiative Support Corporation (LISC) Bay Area.
“Manufactured micro-homes are less costly than stick-built homes,” said Meredith Rupp, a Fellow with Partnership for the Bay’s Future.
They have identified 41 sites in Antioch totaling 75 acres. But regulatory changes are needed. They will work with Community Development Director Forrest Ebbs on that before bringing to the city council for consideration.
“Our preliminary vision is to develop a library of pre-approved plans…ready, off-the-shelf for homeowners to use,” said Jasmine Tarkoff, also of Hope Solutions.
A Resident Empowerment Program is the “third pillar” of the effort including mental health services and support for job training, and other “wrap-around” services, shared Deborah Carney, of Hope Solutions and an Antioch resident.
According to the Partnership for the Bay’s Future website, the Breakthrough Grants program is “to help communities pass equitable housing policy. Selected local governments will receive a dynamic, mission-driven fellow who will work on community-driven local policy in affordable housing production and preservation. The Partnership will also provide two years of grant funding to community partners to engage and activate the local community. The whole Breakthrough Grant cohort will have access to a flexible pool of funding for technical assistance to meet their policy goals. The value of this support is about $500,000 per jurisdiction.”
Examples of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU’s). Source: Partnership for the Bay’s Future
Father Robert Rien of St. Ignatius Catholic Church in Antioch spoke in favor of the program. “I have seen homelessness right up front. We have had a very strong concern about those who are not as blessed us to have homes. One of the issues that has really burned for me are the number of families living out of their cars. The Antioch school district has 235 families living out of their vehicles. We have a number of veterans living along the river.”
“The biggest area of need is affordable housing,” he said. “Our people have income. We’re trying to provide them dignity. Providing a roof over their head is a difficulty. We look forward to partnering together.”
Council Discussion
During council discussion of the item District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock wanted to know, “This is permanent housing?”
“Yes,” was the response.
“Who will be there, families?” she asked. “I would like to see it as a family unit, myself. Under the government entities the County isn’t listed. I’d like to see the County partner with us. They get money from the state.”
“I think it’s a great idea. I love the idea,” Ogorchock continued. “It’s an exciting project and I think it’s something doable within the city.”
District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica, “When we say permanent housing are we talking forever, 30 years? And what is the funding mechanism beyond?”
“They’re built to HCD standards, the same as your home and my home,” Tarkoff explained. “These are not pallet homes or Tuff Sheds. This particular grant is all around being able to develop to explore micro-homes on faith owned home…streamlining the entitlement process.”
The organization is engaged in both public and private funding for the construction and ongoing costs.
“There is no plan in place to get that person into permanent housing?” Barbanica asked.
“The plan is to bring individuals and families, provide them with the housing, with support services…Hope Solutions does not place time limitations on how long an individual can stay in a home,” Tarkoff responded. “Of course, our goal is as individuals heal and want to get into larger housing, we’d like to get them into that trajectory.”
“On our end as policy makers we’ll really only be dealing with zoning,” Mayor Lamar Thorpe said. “This is your project. We don’t set expectations. We spend our time getting the zoning done. We’re not approving anything. We’re not. Just zoning. Certainly, we want to be involved.”
“I still believe in participating in this…proposal at the church,” Ogorchock added. “I think it’s more than just zoning and entitlements.”
“Our job is to not make this cumbersome. We can easily get in the way,” Thorpe stated. “You’re not asking for permission. Let’s create the zoning and let the churches and faith-based organizations get the job done.”
