AUSD is at a crisis point. This is no time to elect someone without the experience, financial or otherwise, to keep the district afloat while critical decisions are being made.
Mary Rocha voted:
• No on hiring the current embattled superintendent,
• No on salary increases without budget impact information,
• No on mass layoffs, without Explanation on how students would still be served with less staff.
Mary has pressed the superintendent to focus on students, parents, and the community, and she has been the voice of reason while the superintendent provided little to no information about the current fiscal crisis
Experience matters. Mary has served on the board since 2018 and is the only trustee who brings experience and institutional understanding to the table. Two members (Cabos Smith and Brown) are in their first term. The current board president (Jag) is not running again and will be replaced in December by a new board member (Reese). The immediate past president (Hernandez) is in his sixth year, however he spent those years pursuing graduate work at Stanford and Davis toward becoming a physician, and in my view gives minimal attention to his role as trustee.
The political practice of districting, implemented in 2022, brought four new members to the board who lacked the experience to make decisions with long-term consequences.
It was not always this way. Before districting, the board was made up of trustees with varied backgrounds and focus. Gary Hack, a former teacher and AEA president, brought understanding of and advocacy for employees. Claire Smith, who had children in the district for many years, was the voice of parents, families, and students. As a former corporate director and nonprofit executive director, I spent my 12 years focused on contracts and fiscal solvency. A diverse board with diverse opinions has always served this district best.
The results of the current board’s decisions are clear:
The superintendent’s hiring. She was hired by a 4-1 vote without fully vetting her background. A simple Google search shows she left Sequoia Union High School District in December 2022 with a $299,000 severance package under a mutual separation agreement, and that her later tenure at Pacifica School District drew backlash over budget deficits and job cuts. Her contract gave her the same number of workdays as a principal, which is unheard of. A new salary scale was created for her, far above those of former superintendents. A $12,000 relocation package was included, and the reimbursements approved only by the board president at the time (Hernandez) are questionable.
Raises for all. The board approval was 4-1 based on a positive certification reported in 2025–26 First Interim Report (December 2025), which should have begun with “once upon a time…
Layoffs. After a deficit of more than $30 million was uncovered, layoffs were made without a solid plan from the superintendent. The scattershot approach, meant to save $18 million, did little to achieve fiscal solvency, and more layoffs are coming.
Special education. The department was reorganized to save $600,000. Directors were combined, left for other districts, or not rehired. That decision gutted the department and leaves the district open to lawsuits, as students may not be receiving their IEP-mandated services.
Today, the district faces a serious deficit, superintendent is on paid administrative leave and has filed a lawsuit naming AUSD, Mary Rocha as an individual, and Unnamed Individuals 1 through 50. In my opinion, that suit is a strategy to secure another package to quietly go away, as she did at Sequoia.
Antioch has faced a number of challenges over the past year—from legal threats by housing developers to unpaid fuel bills, cuts to critical services, vacant commercial properties, a water park that was left closed all summer, and the loss of the El Campanil Theatre. More than ever, the city needs bold leaders who are capable of seeing things as they really are, thinking clearly, and taking decisive action.
In the District 1 council race, only one candidate has those qualities—and it’s not former Antioch councilwoman Joy Motts.
Joy has deep roots and strong ties in the community. Her passion for Antioch and nonprofit work as president of the Celebrate Antioch Foundation, which puts on the city’s Fourth of July Celebration, are commendable. But her track record as an elected official says something different.
Between 2010 and 2014, when Joy served on the Antioch Unified School District Board of Trustees, the district was operating under a 2009 settlement with the ACLU over discriminatory disciplinary practices against students of color. Joy left the board in 2014 with the problem unresolved—in fact, district data showed Black students were suspended more than 2,700 times during the 2013-14 school year compared with 430 white students, according to a report in the East Bay Times. The East County NAACP would later sue the district over similar issues.
In April 2013, when Joy was board president, the families of several special education kindergartners filed a federal lawsuit against the district, alleging a teacher slapped, pinched and verbally abused their children at Mno Grant Elementary and that the district failed to report the abuse to police or Child Protective Services. Trustees voted to pay $8 million to settle the case.
Joy lost reelection to the school board in 2014, ran again in 2016, and lost that race as well. Then in 2018, she was elected to the Antioch City Council.
On June 18, 2020, in the wake of George Floyd’s murder at the hands of Minneapolis police, the city council held special meetings to decide whether to create an ad hoc committee on police reform. The need was obvious, as the Antioch Police Department did not use body cameras, had no formal policy for reviewing deadly use-of-force incidents, and had already settled several costly lawsuits involving in-custody deaths.
After testimony from 700 Antioch residents, some of whom had personally experienced racism and mistreatment by Antioch police, Joy voted against police reform, opting instead for a series of town halls that went nowhere. That decision would have profound consequences on Antioch taxpayers and the city’s reputation.
Four days after Joy’s vote, on June 22, 2020, APD officer Eric Rombough sent a photo on his phone depicting a large naked Black man with his penis exposed sitting on the neck of George Floyd. That text was one of many later uncovered by a Contra Costa District Attorney’s investigation, which showed that dozens of Antioch police officers had exchanged racist and homophobic messages and that some had admitted committing crimes against people of color, including K-9 attacks.
The texting scandal led to the convictions and prison sentences of several Antioch police officers, federal oversight by the U.S. Department of Justice, and $4.6 million paid to settle civil rights claims filed against the city by 23 victims of police misconduct.
Six months after Joy’s vote, four cops showed up to the home of Navy veteran Angelo Quinto, who was experiencing a mental health crisis. One officer knelt on his neck, leading to his death three days later and ultimately a $7.5 million settlement with the city.
It was left to the new city council majority to clean up a mess that made national headlines—a mess that many in the community saw coming, but not Joy.
The progress Antioch has made since then is now in jeopardy. Mayor Ron Bernal—who as city manager was responsible for overseeing the police department when officers were committing crimes against Antioch residents—has already tried to put the Antioch Police Oversight Commission on hold. Meanwhile, the Angelo Quinto Community Response Team, established to prevent another senseless killing, has seen its hours reduced from 24/7 to 12 hours a day, which could place other lives at risk.
The mayor and his deep-pocketed friends are now vigorously supporting Joy’s campaign because they want a rubber-stamp council. But what they want is not what Antioch needs. The city needs leaders who are capable of collaborating, but who are also ready to stand up and fight for those who don’t have a seat at the table and keep the city out of legal jeopardy.
District 1 already has such a leader in Tamisha Torres-Walker.
Tamisha not only supported the creation of the Angelo Quinto Community Response Team, but also the creation of the Antioch Police Oversight Commission, the city’s first civilian police oversight body, and helped advance body cameras for officers and other critical police reforms.
Tamisha fought to bring in over $10 million in outside funding to the Department of Community Resources, including grants to support gun violence prevention and the city’s paid internship program for young adults. She also championed a $34.9 million grant for permanent supportive housing for the city’s unhoused residents and the creation of the Sycamore Square police substation.
And when it was discovered that Antioch had the highest tenant eviction rates during the pandemic, Tamisha supported ordinances to stabilize rents, protect tenants from landlord harassment, and require just cause evictions. She is now pushing for a vacancy tax to hold absentee property owners accountable and reduce blight.
Too often, voters in cities like Antioch choose candidates who know how to get elected but don’t know how to lead. It’s why the same names keep recycling in and out of positions on the school board and city council.
Sure, they care about Antioch and seem to say the right things. Everyone wants downtown revitalization, safe neighborhoods and functional city services. But they lack the courage, vision, and energy to act decisively in critical moments, before it’s too late.
Tamisha Torres-Walker was built for those moments. She has spent her time on the council listening to constituents, doing the work, and using her council seat to advocate for all Antioch residents—and she has the track record to prove it. District 1 voters need to send her back to the council for four more years of progress.
How do we move forward when it feels like we keep taking steps backward?
That’s the question I find myself asking every time a new City Council agenda is released – and why I talk so much.
Across the Bay Area and throughout California, communities are finding creative ways to adapt to a changing economy, workforce shortages, tightening budgets and the evolving needs of residents. They are identifying opportunities, thinking bigger and finding ways to move projects forward.
For example:
Brentwood, CA is nearly complete with the Sand Creek Sports Complex
Kern County is developing one of California’s largest master-planned active-lifestyle communities for seniors.
Martinez has a draft of what its waterfront could look like.
Oakley, CA is breaking ground on the Amtrak station this week and has a 55-acre park plus other sports fields coming in the future.
Ontario, CA is developing a 200-acre sports empire with a 6,500 seat baseball stadium and eight baseball/softball diamonds.
Pittsburg, CA Dream Courts are nearing completion.
Plumas Lake, north of Sacramento, is getting a wave park on more than 100 acres.
Rancho Cordova is moving forward with plans for a 7,500-plus-seat arena.
Richmond, CA has $550 million coming from Chevron that they get to put to work.
Walnut Creek, CA is making major improvements in Heather Farms.
Antioch…. Crickets.
Actually, scratch that. In Antioch, we are losing things such as the El Campanil Theatre, Babe Ruth Fields, our Amtrak Station and are mall is on its last leg.
Every other community in State of California isn’t sitting around waiting for opportunity to knock. They’re creating it by doing the work and actually being inviting—it also helps when a city is clean and crime is under control.
For a decade, Antioch has used the word “opportunity” as its motto, yet actions say otherwise. At what point do we stop talking about opportunity and instead put shovels in the ground and begin working towards our potential.
Too often, it feels like we wait, hope something happens or throw up our hands before we even get started. That mentality has to change. Our city deserves better, our residents deserve better, and our future is worth fighting for.
We have so many underutilized assets that its embarrassing – the delta waterfront, the foothills of Mount Diablo, our agricultural heritage. Instead, Antioch apparently has lost its identity and we have no idea what we want to be in 10, 20, or 30 years from now.
It’s difficult to create a roadmap for the future when we haven’t even agreed on where we’re trying to go. There is no map. There is no vision. There is no plan.
And that’s where leadership matters.
If we want meaningful plans that reflect the priorities, needs and aspirations of our residents, we need a City Hall that is capable of helping lead those conversations. That requires strong leadership from the city manager’s office, competent department heads and a culture that encourages innovation, accountability and problem-solving.
Unfortunately, when leadership breaks down, the entire organization suffers – which we are experiencing right now with Band-Aid solutions to lipstick on a pig commentary.
How can we expect staff, or even investors, to bring forward bold ideas, pursue economic development opportunities or engage residents in meaningful discussions when we are still struggling to manage basic contracts?
Look no further than what happened at the last City Council meeting.
I raised concerns about nearly $500,000 in contract amendments involving work at the water park. These amendments were placed on the consent calendar, where items are typically approved without discussion.
The council ultimately approved the amendments, potentially avoiding a legal dispute with the contractor.
But here’s the problem: The work had already been completed nearly a month before the amendments were brought to the council for approval.
Think about that for a moment.
Under the city’s contracting rules, agreements exceeding $50,000 require City Council approval. Yet somehow, additional work approaching half a million dollars was either authorized beyond the appropriate approval process or allowed to proceed without sufficient oversight.
Then, after the work was completed, the council was essentially asked to approve the bill.
What would have happened if the council had voted no?
Would the city have faced a lawsuit? Would taxpayers have been left paying even more? Who was responsible for ensuring the proper approvals were obtained before the work began?
These aren’t minor administrative questions. They go directly to accountability, communication, financial oversight and the basic responsibility of protecting taxpayer dollars.
And frankly, the City Council should never be put in a position where it is asked to approve nearly $500,000 in additional spending after the work is already finished.
This is precisely the type of dysfunction that erodes public confidence in City Hall – and this isn’t even bringing up the staff report on the Economic Development Department and staff mailing in the item for council to basically work through with few details and boundaries, such as the budget.
I realize I am a candidate in Antioch District 4, but with an election coming quickly, I would hope all voters would require candidates to actually explain how they intend to fix basic problems at city hall. Not with campaign rhetoric, talking point, fancy slogans we here every year, but provide an actual plan that could result in real solutions.
Perhaps Mayor Pro Tem Don Freitas is onto something with his request for a centralized purchasing department responsible for all contract administration, compliance, and ensuring proper procedures are followed. It warrants some serious consideration given the water park example above.
It’s a practical proposal that deserves discussion which apparently went over the head of the rest of the city council.
There is no doubt in my mind that many parts of City Hall seem to operate like the Wild West, with inconsistent oversight, questionable communication and problems being addressed only after they’ve already occurred.
That isn’t how a professional organization should function, particularly one responsible for managing millions of dollars in public funds. It is almost worth a call to the Grand Jury and let them see if my hunches are correct.
Antioch needs leadership that sets expectations, holds departments accountable, empowers employees to succeed and ensures that basic government operations are handled correctly.
We also need a City Council willing to require those standards rather than simply accepting explanations after the fact.
Bottom line: You cannot build a city of opportunity on a foundation of dysfunction and not everyone playing by the same rulebook.
We should be talking about economic development, new amenities, attracting investment, supporting local businesses and creating a community that future generations are proud to call home. You know, showcasing potential.
Instead, we’re spending valuable time cleaning up preventable mistakes over and over again.
Our community has tremendous potential. The location, the people, the natural beauty and the opportunities are all here. What we need now is the leadership, vision and discipline to put those assets to work.
We shouldn’t have to wait another year or two for competent management, better communication and basic accountability. And we certainly shouldn’t have to wait for detail oriented staff reports with all the information that would inform a community – it would actually shorten council meetings.
Antioch should understand that opportunity isn’t something you hang on a wall or put on letterhead and it happens. It’s something you pursue, plan for and deliver.
And until City Hall starts operating with that mindset, we’re going to keep asking the same frustrating question: How do we move forward when we keep shooting ourselves in the foot with the same issues over and over again.
Rescued produce sorted at White Pony Express before delivery to community partners in Contra Costa County. Photo: WPE
Guest Commentary
By Tyler McCarthy, Outreach Associate, White Pony Express
On Friday afternoon, for a student who eats breakfast and lunch at school, the dismissal bell does more than end the school day. It starts a 68-hour clock. The last dependable school meal of the week has just been served. The next one won’t arrive until Monday morning.
We hear from our school partners what those hours can mean. As one parent liaison put it: “My thinking was that if I can give them a meal for Saturday, then they only have to get through Sunday. That lessens the need.”
California has done something remarkable. In 2022–23, it became the first state in the nation to guarantee every public school student access to free breakfast and lunch, regardless of family income. Nearly 3.5 billion school meals have been served since the program began.
It works. And at a time when changes to federal nutrition programs are putting additional pressure on some California families, it’s an achievement we must protect.
But hunger doesn’t follow a school calendar.
California’s universal meals program feeds children during the school day. Children still need to eat Friday night, Saturday, Sunday, holidays and school breaks. California has also embraced summer grocery benefits for eligible families, another important piece of the solution. But summer assistance does not solve the gap that arrives every week between Friday afternoon and Monday morning.
For a family already choosing between rent, utilities, transportation, and groceries, those aren’t simply gaps in a schedule. They can be the days the refrigerator runs empty. That’s where White Pony Express makes an enormous difference.
Every day, White Pony Express drivers collect surplus food from grocers, farms, wholesalers, and restaurants – high-quality food that is perfectly good but has nowhere to go. We sort it for quality the same day and deliver it, free of charge, to neighbors throughout Contra Costa County. Of the 135,000 people White Pony Express serves each year, nearly one-third – about 40,300 – are children.
Photo: WPE
Our School Pantry Program brings fresh groceries directly into 23 school communities where 80 percent or more of students qualify for free or reduced-price meals. Families shop at no cost, with no forms and no questions asked.
One pantry coordinator remembers a young mother raising three children alone after losing her husband. She came to the pantry for groceries, including peanut butter and chicken.
“She doesn’t have money to buy much,” the coordinator told us, “but she told me it’s a blessing to have White Pony Express helping us.”
Since the School Pantry Program began in 2015, White Pony Express has delivered more than three million pounds of food to school communities – the equivalent of roughly 2.5 million meals.
The model works because it connects two resources that already exist: good food that would otherwise go unused and trusted neighborhood schools where families already gather.
It also demonstrates something larger. Public programs and community organizations do not have to compete with one another. They can complete one another.
Photos: WPE
California has shown what is possible when we make a public commitment to feed children at school and then build a system capable of doing it at an extraordinary scale. Now we need to look just as honestly at the hours the school cafeteria cannot cover.
More than two million California children still lack reliable access to healthy food. For them, the problem doesn’t begin Monday morning. It begins Friday afternoon, when the bell rings. And that is a gap communities like ours can – and must – close.
To volunteer, donate food, or support the School Pantry Program, visit whiteponyexpress.org.
An offer has been accepted, and a closing date has been set. Now the home is going through escrow, and the process begins and ends once the financing is approved and the buyer and seller have fulfilled their requirements. So how does it work?
A neutral third-party agent of the principals—buyer, seller, lender and borrower—is designated the escrow holder. This agent assists with the transfer of ownership by ensuring that the terms of the transaction are completed including safeguarding all funds (including the buyer’s deposit) and documents.
The escrow holder is given instructions from the buyer and seller and keeps track of obligations. For example, if the seller is required to supply a termite inspection, the escrow holder will make sure it is fulfilled before any funds are transferred to the seller. Findings in the termite inspection report must be corrected on or before the close of escrow.
In addition, the escrow holder receives from the title company a complete ownership history of the property and any liens on record in the preliminary title report. Any discrepancies that affect the condition of the title, such as condo liens, judgments, etc., against the buyer and seller, must be addressed prior to close of escrow.
Source: thepaymentsbusiness.com
The escrow process can last any number of days depending on what is agreed upon between the buyer and the seller. To ensure a timely closing, it is important that each party provides the escrow holder requested information as soon as possible. For example, a lender will not fund a new home without a homeowner’s insurance policy. Without the lender’s verification that there is insurance, the escrow process may be delayed. An unsecured source of funding, such as a personal check, can also delay the process, because it takes longer for those types of funds to clear.
Most buyers think that their check will not be cashed until the close of escrow, but that is not the case. The check is cashed by the escrow company immediately and held in a trust account. If anything out of the ordinary is to be done at the close of escrow with the seller’s proceeds, the escrow holder must be notified. A signed amendment is required for wiring funds or splitting proceeds.
The escrow process is just one step towards fulfilling the dream of homeownership. Your real estate professional can provide more detail on the escrow process, as well as answer other questions you may have about home buying and selling.
Patrick McCarran is a local Realtor and Broker DRE# 01325072. He can be contacted by phone or text at (925) 899-5536, pmccarran@yahoo.com or www. CallPatrick.com. An independently owned and operated office. In association with Realty One Group Elite DRE# 0193160. Equal Housing Opportunity.
Rick Carreher in a 2021 photo the year he stepped down as executive director of the theatre. Photos courtesy of El Campanil Theatre Preservation Foundation
And for City to be ready to step in
September 10, 2026
To the Editor:
As the founding executive director of the El Campanil Theatre Preservation Foundation, I feel compelled to speak now — not only because I started this venture, but because this is the critical moment when the Theatre’s future will be decided.
The El Campanil opened in 1928 as a vaudeville house and later operated as a church before our foundation acquired it in 2003. Restoring it to working order required more than a million dollars. Since then, it has hosted community events and major stage acts, and it has remained open to the public throughout.
Source: El Campanil Theatre
In 2023, after COVID wiped out major funding, the theatre nearly went bankrupt. We honored the right of first refusal we had given the city, but the city took no action. We then accepted a bid from an out-of-state investor, and the foundation stayed on as tenant.
Now, facing closure again in 2026, the property owner listed the building. A church has made an offer, but that congregation expects to outgrow it and faces serious parking problems. Meanwhile, the city holds roughly seven million dollars earmarked for acquiring community-beneficial buildings.
We ask the church to reconsider its offer, and we ask the City to be ready to step in the moment the church finds a better fit — so this Theatre can keep serving Antioch for generations to come.
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.
All-gender restroom in California’s State Capitol building. Video screenshot source: CA Family Council
“The law requires that every school campus have at least one all-gender restroom option available to students.”
By Greg Burt, Vice President, California Family Council
SACRAMENTO, CA — California is quietly moving toward mixed-sex bathrooms in K-12 public schools, and the state’s own Department of Education is leading the way.
A new law California Family Council opposed, SB 760, now requires schools to provide at least one “all-gender” restroom option on campus.
Passed in September 2023, the bill was cosponsored by then-State Senator Steve Glazer (D-Orinda). He, then-State Senator Nancy Skinner, now-State Sen. Tim Grayson and Assemblymembers Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, Buffy Wicks, and Lori Wilson who represent Contra Costa County, voted for the bill.
The stated goal was to make transgender-identified students feel safer from bullying. But in the rush to accommodate those students’ feelings, lawmakers apparently gave little thought to a different safety question: what happens when boys are given access to girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms?
The State Is Already Building the Roadmap
The California Department of Education has an entire webpage dedicated to “All Access Restrooms,” describing it as a resource offering background information, planning and design resources, laws and regulations, and references for implementing “gender-inclusive” restrooms in K-12 schools.
The background information on that page acknowledges that “the designs of all-access restrooms have been trending in schools throughout the state, the country, and the world,” while noting there are currently no California design standards for these facilities. In other words, the trend is already underway, and the standards are still catching up.
The planning section of the CDE page is even more candid about the scope of what is being proposed. It describes “shifting from multi-user gendered restrooms and single-user all-gender restrooms to offering blocks of restroom facilities for all students;” meaning the goal is not just a single converted nurse’s bathroom tucked in a hallway. The ambition is to redesign entire blocks of school restroom facilities so that boys and girls share the same space.
What Would It Look Like?
The new all-gender bathroom designs typically eliminate urinals entirely, replacing them with individual private stalls accessible to everyone. The CDE’s resources page recommends an academic article published in the Education Sciences Journal titled “Expanding the Scope of Universal Design: Implications for Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation,” by Ellyn Couillard and Jeanne L. Higbee (2018), as a guide for implementation. That an academic paper on gender identity ideology is among the state’s recommended planning resources tells you something about the ideological framework driving these design decisions.
But keep in mind, SB 760 doesn’t require a complete redesign of a single-sex bathroom for it to become all-gender.
You Already Saw It at the State Capitol
If you want to get a glimpse of what legislators have in mind when they convert a single sex bathroom into an all gender bathroom, take a look at one of the converted male bathrooms at the state capitol, used by legislative staffers, adult visitors, and elementary school children visiting on field trips. California Family Council recently took a video of the empty bathroom located to one side of the Capitol Dome.
“I’m pretty sure most parents would object to their young children sharing a bathroom while men are using the urinals,” Burt said. “Even without the adult issue, I’ve witnessed the chaos that occurs when young boys are pouring into the same bathrooms as the girls while visiting the Capitol. The girls are not happy about it.” (Watch video tour of Capitol bathroom https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okTcKcP3ACQ)
So, what should parents expect when multi-stall bathrooms are converted to all gender at their child’s school?
What the Law Actually Requires — And What It Doesn’t
It is important to be clear about what SB 760 does and does not mandate. The law requires that every school campus have at least one all-gender restroom option available to students. It could be single-stall or multi-stall. It must be supplied with menstrual products starting in 3rd grade, and it must be unlocked and easily accessible. But there are no requirements that urinals be removed or that additional privacy measures be added to stalls.
Sex-separated restrooms are still permitted, and most schools will continue to have them.
Burt explained what this means in practice for families. “How each school fulfills this new requirement is entirely up to the local school board. A conservative district might simply relabel a single-occupancy nurse’s bathroom and call it done. A progressive district could use this law as a green light to convert entire multi-stall restroom facilities to mixed-sex use. Parents need to find out right now what their district is planning,” he said.
The CDE’s planning resources make clear that the broader vision goes well beyond a single-stall accommodation in the corner of the building. It points toward a wholesale redesign of school bathroom facilities, one that treats sex-separated restrooms as a problem to be solved rather than a common-sense protection for children.
The Question Nobody in Sacramento Answered
SB 760’s supporters argued the law was needed to protect transgender-identified students from harassment, but the legislature never seriously asked the parallel question: does giving boys access to girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms create new opportunities for harassment and assault of girls?
California has seen case after case in recent years where policies designed to accommodate gender identity have created unsafe situations for female students. The discomfort of girls sharing intimate spaces with biological males is not a lesser concern. Lawmakers who refused to weigh it have not protected children. They have simply chosen which children’s safety matters.
Parents: Now Is the Time to Speak Up
Because each school board will decide how to implement SB 760 on its own campuses, parents have a real opportunity to influence what happens at their child’s school, but that window will not stay open indefinitely. Decisions about restroom redesigns and facility changes get made early in the budget and planning process, often before most parents are even aware the conversation is happening.
If you want a say in how your district handles this new requirement, call your school board member and school administrators now. Ask them directly: how does our district plan to fulfill the SB 760 all-gender restroom requirement? Will existing sex-separated restrooms be preserved? Will multi-stall facilities be converted? Every parent deserves to know the answers.
California Family Council works to advance God’s design for life, family, and liberty through California’s Church, Capitol, and Culture. By advocating for policies that reinforce the sanctity of life, the strength of traditional marriages, and the essential freedoms of religion, CFC is dedicated to preserving California’s moral and social foundation.
