Contra Costa Herald

By Gail Murray, League of Women Voters of Diablo Valley

How secure are our elections? On September 24 at 2:00 p.m., join a Community Conversations informative webinar exploring the safeguards that protect our voting systems and ensure every eligible vote is counted accurately.

Panelists will describe election security, ballot protection, and the processes that help maintain public confidence in our democracy. Whether you’re a new voter or a longtime election volunteer, you’ll leave with a better understanding of how safe and secure our elections really are.

Panelists:

• Kristin Connelly, Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder and Registrar of Voters

Reelected in June; focus is on voter access, election transparency and battling election misinformation.

• Helen Hutchison, past president of the League of Women Voters of California

Serving at the state League, worked on initiative and referendum reform, ballot measures and redistricting.

Register here to join: https://ccclib.bibliocommons.com/v2/events/6a849254bf1aec09082b6699

Information on how to access the Zoom webinar will be sent to your email address 24 hours before the program.

The webinar will have simultaneous Spanish interpretation and the Contra Costa County Library will provide closed captioning. This program will be recorded and uploaded to the Library’s YouTube and the LWVDV YouTube channels after the event. For special accommodations, please contact the Library with 72 hours’ notice.

Sponsors include the League of Women Voters of Diablo Valley, the League of Women Voters of West Contra Costa County, the Contra Costa County Library and Contra Costa TV.

Contact programs@lwvdv.org for more information.

Read More

A set of investments, projects and strategies to improve efficiency, reduce delays and move more people and buses across the most-traveled bridge in the Bay Area.

By Metropolitan Transportation Commission

The San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (Bay Bridge) corridor is a vital lifeline for commuter and business travel to and from the City of San Francisco and the East Bay.  It is consistently ranked the most congested corridor in the region. Severe traffic congestion occurs on the approaches to the bridge, especially in the morning commute hours. Vehicles spend more hours delayed approaching the Bay Bridge than on all the other Bay Area east-west crossings combined.  At times, this congestion prevents high-occupancy vehicles (HOVs) and buses from accessing the existing by-pass lanes at the toll plaza – and is worse than the congestion on the bridge itself.  At the same time, high rates of people driving alone and lower transit ridership means that more than half of the seats in vehicles crossing the Bay Bridge are empty.

The Bay Bridge Forward Program proposes solutions that would increase the number of people moving through the area by filling empty seats. This would improve operations and reduce congestion without hefty capital investments. Bay Bridge Forward includes a suite of projects to: improve transit travel time and reliability; promote carpooling and transit ridership; increase the number of people who can move through the corridor (person throughput); and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Project 6 – Interstate 80, Bay Bridge & Carquinez Bridge HOV Lane Hours of Operation

Part of the Bay Bridge Forward commute initiative, the Interstate 80, Bay Bridge & Carquinez Bridge HOV Lane Hours of Operation is one of several projects that aim to improve traffic congestion for the Interstate 80 (I-80) corridor between the Carquinez Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.

• Overview

This project is evaluating extended hours of operation of the high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes along the Interstate 80 corridor between the San Francisco-Bay Bridge and the Carquinez Bridge and at the approaches to both bridges.

While the corridor experiences significant congestion beyond traditional peak periods, the current HOV hours of operation are limited to weekdays between 5 a.m. and 10 a.m. and between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. Project 6a’s analysis and implementation will evaluate expanding the hours to include midday and weekend operations.

This project aims to:

• Provide more reliable travel times for transit riders and carpools during periods of prevalent midday and weekend congestion; and
• Encourage transit use and carpooling.

• Project Schedule

As of the latest update in April 2026, the estimated completion dates for the Traffic Analysis is 2026, for Final Design is 2027 and for Construction is 2028.

Project 6 – Interstate 80 HOV Lane Access Restrictions

Also part of the Bay Bridge Forward commute initiative, the Interstate 80 HOV Lane Access Restrictions is one of several projects that aim to improve traffic congestion for the Interstate 80 (I-80) corridor between the Carquinez Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.

• Overview

This project proposes to implement access restrictions along select segments of the existing high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes on the Interstate 80 corridor between the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge and the Carquinez Bridge. Access restrictions are expected to improve traffic flow in the HOV and general purpose lanes by limiting merges between lanes in congested areas.

Currently, the HOV lane is separated from general traffic by a dashed line, which indicates that it is OK to enter and exit the HOV lane at any point. Project 6b would add lane access restrictions by replacing the existing lane striping and painting double solid white lines between the existing HOV lane and the general-purpose lane, to restrict vehicles from entering or exiting the HOV lanes at select segments. Double white lines indicate it is illegal to enter and exit the lane.

• Project Schedule

As of April 20226, the Project Initiation Document was completed in April 2026, and the estimated completion date for the Project Approval & Environmental Document is sometime this year, the Final Design in 2027 and Construction in 2028.

Project 6 – Interstate 580 Westbound to Interstate 80 Eastbound Connector Bus Lane

The Interstate 580 Westbound to Interstate 80 Eastbound Connector Bus Lane is one of several projects of the Bay Bridge Forward commute initiative that aim to improve traffic congestion for the Interstate 80 (I-80) corridor between the Carquinez Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.

• Overview

The Interstate 80 (I-80) Bus-on-Shoulder Feasibility Analysis assessed the feasibility of pursuing bus-on-shoulder or bus lane segments on or connecting to I-80, and identified potential segments to move into project development.

One of the segments moving forward is the Interstate 580 (I-580) westbound to I-80 eastbound Connector Bus Lane. This project would construct a bus-only lane by reducing the existing right and left shoulders on the westbound I-580 to eastbound I-80 direct connector ramp. The project aims to:

• Reduce bus delays;
• Provide travel time reliability for buses; and
• Encourage the use of public transit in this congested segment.

• Project Schedule

The Feasibility Analysis was completed in Summer 2025; the Project Initiation Document (PID) is expected to be completed sometime in 2026 and the estimated completion date for Project Approval & Environmental Document and Final Design is in 2027 and Construction in 2029.

Project 6 – Interstate 80 Localized Transit Priority/HOV Strategies

Part of the Bay Bridge Forward commute initiative, Interstate 80 Localized Transit Priority/HOV Strategies is one of several projects that aim to improve traffic congestion for the Interstate 80 (I-80) corridor between the Carquinez Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.

• Overview

The Interstate 80 (I-80) Localized Transit Priority/HOV Strategies project aims to enhance access to HOV preferential lanes and/or add transit signal priority (TSP) equipment at nine interchange locations.

The project is intended to:

• Provide travel time savings for carpools and buses; and
• Increase bus system reliability.

• Project Schedule

The Preliminary Analysis was completed in Summer 2025; the estimated completion date for the Project Initiation Document (PID) is sometime in 2026, Project Approval/Environmental Document (PA/ED) in 2027, Final Design in 2028 and Construction in 2029.

Project 2 – Interstate 580 Westbound HOV Lane Extension

The Bay Bridge Forward’s Interstate 580 Westbound HOV Lane Extension project proposes to extend the existing high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane on westbound Interstate 580 to reduce traffic backup during morning peak hours.

• Overview

The Interstate 580 (I-580) westbound corridor serves as an approach to the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge and is a key transbay commute corridor that connects the East Bay to San Francisco.

The corridor experiences heavy traffic congestion during morning peak hours, with traffic backing up to the Interstate 980 (I-980)/State Route 24 (SR-24) interchange.

MTC – in partnership with Alameda County Transportation Commission – proposes to extend the existing HOV lane on I-580 westbound to the area by the I-980/SR-24 interchange as a near-term improvement.

The I-580 Westbound HOV Lane Extension Project seeks to:

• Move more people through the corridor during peak hours.
• Improve travel time reliability to support buses and HOVs.
• Provide time travel savings for HOV and transit users, to encourage people to carpool or take transit.

The project proposes to convert a portion of the far-left lane of westbound I-580 to an HOV lane. From just east of the Piedmont Avenue undercrossing in Oakland, the new HOV lane would connect with the existing HOV lane at the toll plaza approach (just west of the MacArthur maze), a distance of approximately 2.3 miles.

• Project Schedule

The Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Studies were completed in June 2024, Final Design was completed in October 2024, and Construction is estimated to be completed in 2027.

Project 3 – Interstate 80/Powell Street Interchange Transit Access Improvements

Another part of the Bay Bridge Forward commute initiative, the Interstate 80/Powell Street Interchange Transit Access Improvements project aims to improve traffic flow during morning peak commute hours for transit vehicles that enter and exit Interstate 80 through Powell Street.

• Overview

The Interstate 80 (I-80)/Powell interchange currently services multiple transbay bus routes including Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) lines and the Capital Corridor (Amtrak) connecting bus between Emeryville Station and San Francisco.

The existing transit route on the West Frontage Road and I-80 Powell Street loop on-ramp are highly congested during morning peak commute hours. This project is needed to improve vehicle flow and reliability for transit vehicles that enter and exit I-80 through Powell Street.

MTC – in partnership with Alameda County Transportation Commission, the City of Emeryville and AC Transit – is proposing transit facility improvements within the I-80 Powell Street interchange to:

• Improve transit reliability and travel time;
• Improve transit accessibility;
• Promote safety for transit riders; and
• Encourage transit use.

The improvements include:

• The construction of a dedicated transit lane on Powell Street;
• New bus stops with improved pedestrian and bicycle access; and
• Dedicated transit-only signals and detectors at the ramp intersections to facilitate transit priority.

• Project Schedule

Preliminary Engineering & Environmental Studies were completed in July 2023, Final Design was estimated to be completed in Summer 2026, but completion of Construction is To Be Determined as of April 27, 2026.

Project 4 – Interstate 80 Westbound HOV/Bus Lane

The Bay Bridge Forward’s Interstate 80 Westbound HOV/Bus Lane project proposes adding a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane to westbound Interstate 80 (I-80) between the Powell Street Interchange and the Bay Bridge toll plaza.

• Overview

The Interstate 80 (I-80) westbound HOV lane and the HOV connector ramp (also known as the I-80 flyover ramp) serves HOV traffic on the I-80 corridor. The I-80 flyover ramp provides a direct connection to the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge toll plaza, allowing buses and HOVs to bypass a major bottleneck north of the I-80/I-880/I-580 junction. Heavy traffic congestion in the vicinity of the I-80 Powell Street interchange can prevent buses and HOVs from accessing the I-80 flyover ramp.

MTC – in partnership with Alameda County Transportation Commission – proposes adding an HOV lane to the outside of the westbound I-80 between Powell Street Interchange and the Bay Bridge toll plaza. This project will benefit transit vehicles entering from the Powell Street interchange, as well as other HOVs traveling on westbound I-80 that cannot use the existing leftmost HOV lane due to congestion. This project seeks to:

• Improve the operational efficiency and travel time for buses and HOVs on westbound I-80;
• Move more people through the area during peak hours; and
• Encourage carpooling and transit use.

• Project Schedule

The Preliminary Engineering was completed in July 2025 and the estimated completion date for Environmental Studies is To Be Determined.

Project 1 – West Grand Avenue Bus & High Occupancy Vehicle Lane

The Bay Bridge Forward’s West Grand Avenue Bus & High Occupancy Vehicle Lane project will construct a dedicated westbound bus and carpool lane on West Grand Avenue for travelers approaching the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.

• Overview

In 2016, MTC – in partnership with Caltrans and the City of Oakland – proposed the construction of a dedicated bus and carpool lane on West Grand Avenue to improve the travel time for buses and carpoolers approaching the Bay Bridge toll plaza from West Grand Avenue.

The project is separated into two phases.

• Phase 1: Complete

In 2019, the first phase was constructed, which created a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane on the Interstate 80 (I-80) West Grand Avenue on-ramp. It converted approximately 1,300 feet of right shoulder into a bus/HOV lane.

The bus/HOV lane is open to buses 24 hours a day, seven days a week. HOVs with three or more occupants are allowed to use the lane during weekday peak hours, 5 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. to 7 p.m.  The new HOV lane has provided substantial travel time savings for buses and HOVs, bypassing congestion during the morning peak period.

• Phase 2: In Progress

As of April 2026, development of the second phase is currently underway. It will extend the existing bus/HOV lane from its current terminus on the West Grand Avenue on-ramp further east to Frontage Road. This would allow buses to bypass a major queue on West Grand Avenue. The new bus/HOV lane will be open to HOVs with three or more occupants during the weekday peak hours (5 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. to 7 p.m.).

Phase two of the project also proposes to construct a class I multi-use path on the south side of West Grand Avenue to close a 0.7-mile gap in the existing West Oakland bicycle network. The multi-use path would provide a key connection to the existing class I multi-use path on Maritime Street to the west and class II bike lanes on Mandela Parkway to the east of the project area.

Phase two construction is expected to begin in 2027. When completed, the project will bring additional benefits for carpools, buses, pedestrians and bicyclists.

• Project Schedule

Phase 1 Construction was completed in 2019, Phase 2 Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Studies were completed in Summer 2023, Phase 2 Final Design is expected to be completed sometime in 2026 and Phase 2 Construction in winter 2027.

See an expanded version of the Bay Bridge Forward program projects map. Project details are below.

Project 5 – Smart Transbay Transit

The Bay Bridge Forward’s Smart Transbay Transit project aims to deliver near-term Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) enhancements.

• Project Overview

The Smart Transbay Transit project is split into two phases. Phase one, now complete, consisted of planning and analysis. A future phase two will include technical design.

In phase one, MTC collaborated with Contra Costa Transportation Authority, WestCat, AC Transit, Alameda County Transportation Commission  and local cities in the East Bay.

The goals of the first phase were to:

• Assess current transbay bus operations;
• Analyze strategies to improve transbay bus service; and
• Define preferred corridors and concepts for project development.

The first phase recommended the implementation of Transit Signal Priority and traffic signal enhancements to select corridors. Traveler information strategies were also assessed.

• Project Schedule

Planning and Analysis were completed in Spring 2026, and the estimated completion dates for Technical Design is in 2027 and Implementation in 2027-28.

View the expanded Bay Bridge Forward Projects Map.

Read More

By Patrick McCarran, Real Estate Broker

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.

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.

Paid advertising.

Read More

By Chrystine Robbins, Deputy, County Administrator’s Office

(Martinez, CA) – The Contra Costa Commission for Women and Girls is currently recruiting for vacant At-Large member seats and the District IV seat. Successful candidates must reside or work within Contra Costa County. The Commission meets the fourth Tuesday of each month from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. except for holidays.

The Board of Supervisors established the Commission in 1984. The Commission has 15 member seats and one alternate seat composed of 5 District Members and 10 At-Large Members. In addition to attending monthly meetings, members will serve on sub-committees and meet with district representatives. The Contra Costa Commission for Women and Girls (CCCWG) was formed to educate the community and advise the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on issues relating to the changing social and economic conditions of women in the County, with particular emphasis on the economically disadvantaged. The Commission’s mission is, “to improve the economic status, social welfare, and overall quality of life for women in Contra Costa County.”

Application forms can be obtained from the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors by calling (925) 655-2000 or visiting the County webpage at www.contracosta.ca.gov/3418. District-specific applications should be submitted directly to the respective Supervisor’s Office. All applications can also be emailed to ClerkoftheBoard@cob.cccounty.us.

For further information about the Contra Costa Commission for Women and Girls, please contact Chair Marilyn Lucey at cccwomenscommission@gmail.com. You can also visit the web page at https://www.cccwomenscommission.com/.

Read More

Today is Constitution Day, celebrating the U.S. Constitution which was created on September 17, 1787 and ratified on March 4, 1789. Read more about the celebration and document, here. Following is the Preamble with the original spelling and punctuation.

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

To read the complete text, visit the U.S. Archives by clicking here: http://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript

Read More

Takes 90 days to begin process

Local agencies, private groups and citizens can “identify, evaluate, register and protect California’s historical resources.”

By Allen D. Payton

In response to the sale of the historic El Campanil Theatre in Antioch’s downtown Rivertown, it was revealed that it is not yet designated an historic building by either the state or federal governments. Last year and earlier this year, District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson requested to be placed on a meeting agenda having the City look into how to preserve it as an historic site and members of the public have recently made the same request. (See related article, specifically the paragraphs below the sub-headline entitled, “One Councilmember Made Requests to Agendize Protection, But Not Purchase of El Campanil Theatre”).

A simple internet search produced the following: for state designation, the building must meet certain criteria, the owner must not object, the clerk of the local government agency must be notified 90 days prior to submitting the nomination package to the California Office of Historic Preservation – which can now be done electronically as of September 1, 2026; be recommended by the CA Historical Resources Commission; and be officially designated by the Director of California State Parks.

According to the California Historical Landmarks Registration page of the state Department of Parks and Recreation’s website, “California Historical Landmarks are sites, buildings, features, or events that are of statewide significance and have anthropological, cultural, military, political, architectural, economic, scientific or technical, religious, experimental, or other value. The specific standards now in use were first applied in the designation of Landmark # 770.  California Historical Landmarks #770 and above are automatically listed in the California Register of Historical Resources.

According to that page, “The State Historical Resources Commission has designed this program for use by state and local agencies, private groups and citizens to identify, evaluate, register and protect California’s historical resources.”

California Historical Landmarks (Landmarks) have statewide significance and California Points of Historical Interest (Points) are of local (city or county) significance.

To be designated as a California Historical Landmark, a resource must meet at least one of the criteria listed below; have the approval of the property owner(s); be recommended by the State Historical Resources Commission; and be officially designated by the Director of California State Parks.

If a site is primarily of local interest, it may meet the criteria for the California Points of Historical Interest Program.

Criteria for Designation

• Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage (Criterion 1).
• Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past (Criterion 2).
• Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values (Criterion 3).
• Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history (Criterion 4).

According to “the California Historical Building Code (CHBC), which is defined in Sections 18950 to 18961 of Division 13, Part 2.7 of Health and Safety Code (H&SC). The CHBC is intended to save California’s architectural heritage by recognizing the unique construction issues inherent in maintaining and adaptively reusing historic buildings. The CHBC provides alternative building regulations for permitting repairs, alterations and additions necessary for the preservation, rehabilitation, relocation, related construction, change of use, or continued use of a ‘qualified historical building or structure.’”

Furthermore, according to the Office of Historic Preservation,  “Section 18955 of the Health and Safety Code defines a ‘qualified historical building or structure’ as ‘any structure or property, collection of structures, and their associated sites deemed of importance to the history, architecture, or culture of an area by an appropriate local or state governmental jurisdiction. This shall include structures on existing or future national, state or local historical registers or official inventories, such as the National Register of Historic Places, State Historical Landmarks, State Points of Historical Interest, and city or county registers or inventories of historical or architecturally significant sites, places, historic districts, or landmarks. This shall also include places, locations, or sites identified on these historical registers or official inventories and deemed of importance to the history, architecture, or culture of an area by an appropriate local or state governmental jurisdiction.’”

The Technical Assistance Series #13 report by the California Office of Historic Preservation in the Department of Parks and Recreation, “describes the criteria and procedures for nominating a historical resource under two of the state registration programs: California Historical Landmarks (Landmarks), and California Points of Historical Interest (Points).”

STATE REGISTRATION

How to Nominate a Property as a California Historical Landmark or California Point of Historical Interest

1. Download the Nomination Packet, including all appropriate DPR 523 forms. Only use the DPR 523 Forms that are applicable to the nominated resource (generally, one DPR 523A, one DPR 523B, and, if needed, the DPR 523L Continuation Sheet) If you need assistance, contact Registration Unit staff.
2. Complete application, including all necessary supplemental forms, according to instructions. If you need assistance, contact Registration Unit staff. Note: Applicants are no longer required to submit 35mm slides as part of California Register nominations. You may follow the National Park Service Photo Policy for photos included with the DPR forms.
3. Notify the clerk of the local government in whose jurisdiction the resource is located by certified mail that an application will be filed with the OHP and request that the local government provide written comments within 90 days. The notification must include a copy of the application.
4. At the end of the 90 days, you may submit the completed application and any comments to the OHP.
5. OHP staff will send notification to the property owner (if the applicant is not the property owner) and ensure that the nomination packet is complete. Please include the Property Owners Excel Template.

How to submit a Nomination to the OHP:

As of September 1, 2026, nominations and supporting documents can be submitted to the OHP electronically. The OHP will provide each applicant with a secure folder to upload the nomination and supporting documents.

To request a nomination folder:

1. Email calshpo.registration@parks.ca.gov with the subject line “Request for nomination folder link.”
   • In the body of the email, include the
     • The name, address, city, and county of the property
     • Include the email addresses of applicants needing access to the folder.
2. A hyperlink to the folder will be emailed back to the original sender.
3. Upload a Complete Nomination Packet with the following documents:

1. Cover letter identifying
2. which registration program is being pursued,
3. the property being nominated,
4. all property owners and their complete contact information,
5. the applicant and their complete contact information, and
6. any person or organization on whose behalf the nomination is being submitted
7. Excel spreadsheet with email and mailing addresses for all owners and applicants; and
8. California Register of Historical Resources submittals include
   • Certified Mail receipt indicating that the nomination was submitted to the local jurisdiction 90 days prior to submittal to the OHP and any subsequent comment received,
   • Application cover letter, and
   • Completed DPR form(s) with maps and photographs

The OHP will contact the applicant if the documentation is not complete.

If the link to the upload folder does not work, email calshpo.registration@parks.ca.gov and a new link will be sent.

Alternatively, a USB drive with the above documentation may be sent to:

Office of Historic Preservation, ATTN: Registration, 1725 23rd Street, Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95816

Owner Consent

Consent of owner is not required, but a resource cannot be listed over an owner’s objections. The CHRC can, however, formally determine a property eligible for the California Register if the resource owner objects.

Local Government Notification

Local government must be given 90 days in which to comment on the application before it is sent to OHP.

State Agency Assists Local Governments with Preservation Ordinances, More

According to the Mission and Responsibilities for the Office of Historic Preservation, “OHP works with California’s city and county governments to aid them in integrating historic preservation into the broader context of overall community planning and development activities by adopting a comprehensive approach to preservation planning which combines identification, evaluation, and registration of historical resources with strong local planning powers, economic incentives, and informed public participation.
“OHP provides guidance and technical assistance to city and county governments in the following areas:

• Drafting or updating preservation plans and ordinances;
• Planning for and conducting architectural, historical, and archeological surveys;
• Developing criteria for local designation programs, historic districts, historic preservation overlay zones (HPOZs), and conservation districts;
• Developing design guidelines using the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards;
• Developing economic incentives for historic preservation; and
• Training local commissions and review boards.

“OHP also administers the Certified Local Government (CLG) Program and distributes at least 10% of its annual federal Historic Preservation Fund allocation to CLGs through a competitive grant program to them in achieving their historic preservation goals.”

Federal Grants

“Through the Certified Local Government (CLG) Program, local governments receive federal grants to assist with historic preservation programs. A required minimum of ten percent of California’s yearly allocation of federal funds received through the Historic Preservation Fund Grants Program (HPF) make up the grants awarded annually to qualifying certified local governments.

The Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) awards the HPF monies to CLGs in a competitive process. Forms, instructions, and deadlines for active grant cycles are posted to this page during the application periods. To see a list of recent and past award recipients, visit our CLG Grant Awards page.”

NATIONAL REGISTRATION

To nominate a building for the National Register of Historic Places, see the Checklist for Submittal: National Register of Historic Places Nomination Packet and visit this webpage on the state’s Dep’t of Parks and Recreation website for National Register Forms and Related Publications.

 

Read More

Former East Bay financial advisor defrauded at least 93 victims

Faced faces up to 30 years in prison, $500K in fines

By U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of California

OAKLAND – Edwin Emmett Lickiss, Jr., who pleaded guilty to one count of wire fraud and one count of money laundering in connection with a decades-long Ponzi scheme, was sentenced today to nine years in federal prison. U.S. District Judge Jon S. Tigar imposed the sentence.

As previously reported, Lickiss, 78, of Danville, California, admitted that he defrauded at least 93 victims of over $9.5 million from 1998 through September 2024. As part of the scheme, Lickiss said that he would invest victims’ money in exclusive, tax-free bonds that offered rates of return up to 30%. Lickiss also claimed that members of his own family had invested in the bonds, that he charged no investment fees because he had already profited so substantially, and that investors could redeem their money at any time.

In fact, the bonds did not exist. Lickiss funneled money from later victims to pay earlier investors, consistent with a Ponzi scheme. He also siphoned victim funds to pay personal expenses, including cash withdrawals, home renovations, travel, and payments on vehicles, mortgages, and personal credit cards.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) had issued an order barring Lickiss from engaging in any broker-related business from August 18, 2014, through December 17, 2014. Despite the order, Lickiss continued to fraudulently solicit and obtain investments from victims during that period.

According to the IRS, on July 21, 2025, “A federal grand jury indicted Edwin Emmett Lickiss Jr., on one count of wire fraud and one count of money laundering in connection with an alleged $9.5 million investment fraud scheme. Despite the suspension and loss of his broker’s license, Lickiss allegedly continued to solicit and obtain investments from victim investors until around September 2024. Lickiss was a financial advisor based in Danville and Alamo, Calif., who owned and operated Foundation Financial Group, a firm that provided investment services to investors in the Northern District of California, Idaho, and throughout the United States.”

Lickiss was released pending the sentencing hearing. He faced a maximum statutory sentence of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine on the wire fraud count, and 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine on the money laundering count.

In addition, on July 21, 2025, the Securities Exchange Commission charged him with selling fraudulent promissory note investments to approximately 80 investors as part of a Ponzi scheme that lasted over 25 years. According to the SEC’s complaint, Lickiss fraudulently offered and sold to investors approximately $12.7 million in promissory notes, which purported to pay interest rates of between 9 and 32 percent per annum.

United States Attorney Craig H. Missakian, FBI Special Agent in Charge Scott Schelble, and IRS Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) San Francisco Field Office Acting Special Agent in Charge David Lowe made the announcement. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has also filed a civil enforcement action against Lickiss in the Northern District of California.

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Ben Wolinsky of the Illicit Finance and Money Laundering Section, with the assistance of Lynette Dixon. The prosecution is the result of an investigation by the FBI and IRS-CI. The U.S. Attorney’s Office thanks the Atlanta Regional Office of the SEC for its assistance in the investigation.

Further Information:

Case No. 4:25-CR-00202-JST

Electronic court filings and further procedural and docket information are available at https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/login.pl. Judges’ calendars with schedules for upcoming court hearings can be viewed on the court’s website at www.cand.uscourts.gov.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Read More

System’s Medicare, Medicaid and commercial health plans are also rated highest in CA for overall quality

Kaiser Permanente had more 5-star or 4.5-star plans than any other health care organization for 11th ratings cycle in a row

By Elissa Harrington, Sr. Media Relations & PR Rep and Kerri Leedy, Media and Public Relations Manager, Kaiser Permanente Northern California

OAKLAND, Calif., September 16, 2026 – Kaiser Permanente Northern California is one of only two health care systems in the nation to have its Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial health plans receive 5 out of 5 stars for overall quality, according to the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) 2026 Health Plan Ratings.

Only 18 plans in the nation, approximately 2%, received a 5-star rating. The only other health care system in the nation to have its Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial health plans receive 5 out of 5 stars was Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States.

NCQA also rates Kaiser Permanente Northern California health plans as best in California for overall treatment, prevention, and patient experience. No other health plan in Northern California received a 5-star rating.

“Kaiser Permanente Northern California continues to deliver high-value care that improves health care outcomes and betters the lives of our members and patients every day,” said Mike Bowers, FACHE, president of Kaiser Permanente’s Northern California region. “Our health plans are continuously rated the highest because of our unwavering commitment to providing coordinated care and exceptional service.”

For 2026, NCQA rated nearly 1,000 plans – commercial, Medicare, and Medicaid – for quality and service nationwide. All of Kaiser Permanente’s commercial and Medicare plans received the highest rating, or were tied for the highest rating, in all the geographic regions we serve. Kaiser Permanente had more 5-star or 4.5-star plans than any other health care organization for the 11th ratings cycle in a row.

“This recognition reflects the dedication and clinical excellence of our physicians, nurses, and care teams, who consistently deliver the highest-quality care to our patients and the communities we serve,” said Maria Ansari, MD, FACC, CEO and executive director of The Permanente Medical Group. “Kaiser Permanente Northern California is proud to be one of only two health care systems in the nation, alongside Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States, to have its Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial health plans all receive NCQA’s highest rating.”

NCQA is a national, private not-for-profit organization that surveys health plans for performance in a wide range of clinical service measures including consumer experience, prevention, population health and treatment.

NCQA primarily used the 2025 Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set, or HEDIS®, to establish its ratings. HEDIS is the most widely used performance measurement tool in health care.

The 2026 ratings and methodology are posted on the NCQA’s website at https://reportcards.ncqa.org/health-plans. See Kaiser Permanente Northern California ratings at Health Plans – NCQA.

About Kaiser Permanente

Kaiser Permanente is committed to helping shape the future of health care. We are recognized as one of America’s leading health care providers and not-for-profit health plans. Founded in 1945, Kaiser Permanente has a mission to provide high-quality, affordable health care services and to improve the health of our members and the communities we serve. We currently serve 12.9 million members in 9 states and the District of Columbia. Care for members and patients is focused on their total health and guided by their personal Permanente Medical Group physicians, specialists, and team of caregivers. Our expert and caring medical teams are empowered and supported by industry-leading technology advances and tools for health promotion, disease prevention, state-of-the-art care delivery, and world-class chronic disease management. Kaiser Permanente is dedicated to care innovations, clinical research, health education, and the support of community health. For more information, go to about.kp.org.

Read More

Theme: “Delta as Culinary Journey”

Presented by Delta Protection Commission

Sponsored by the Contra Costa County Historical Society

By Kira O’Donnell, National Heritage Area Information Officer, Delta Protection Commission – a California state agency

WEST SACRAMENTO, Calif. (September 16, 2026) – The California Delta’s culinary riches will be celebrated this fall.

On November 5, the annual Delta Heritage Forum presents “Delta as Culinary Journey,” a full-day event presenting a kaleidoscope of food-related cultural stories centered in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, both historic and modern.

The Forum is an event dedicated to celebrating Delta stories, nurturing collaboration, and inspiring new thinking and initiatives in the Delta heritage community. This year the Forum is sponsored by the Contra Costa County Historical Society.

This will be the first time the event focuses on food-centric pioneering innovations and multicultural contributions, as well as the agricultural bounty of the region.

Darrell Corti, president of Corti Brothers in Sacramento, will deliver the opening talk: “Delta as Food Source and Inspiration.”

Other notable speakers include Austin Stevenot, a Northern Sierra Mewuk cultural practitioner who will discuss the foodways of the Original People who flourished in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta; and Dr. Karen Leonard of UC Irvine, who will present the history and food traditions of the Punjabi-Mexican community, a unique cultural fusion of early 20th-century immigrants in California’s Delta and Central Valley regions.

The Forum runs from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. at the Brentwood Community Center. Participants will be well-fed – the event includes morning coffee and pastries, a full lunch and a vintage cake tasting.

Opening and Welcome: Diane Burgis, Chair, Delta Protection Commission

Delta as Food Source and Inspiration: Darrell Corti, President, Corti Brothers

Foodways of the Delta’s Original Inhabitants

Austin Stevenot is a Northern Sierra Mewuk cultural practitioner, enrolled member of the California Valley Miwok Tribe, and Director of Tribal Engagement for River Partners. He discusses the foodways of the Original People who flourished in the California Delta.

Rich Collins – California Endive, Rio Vista

A pioneer in Belgian-style endive production in the Delta, Rich Collins defied the skeptics who claimed this European vegetable couldn’t be successfully farmed in the United States.

Ken Beer – President and owner of The Fishery, Galt

In partnership with Dr. Serge Doroshov, known as the “father of sturgeon aquaculture,” Ken Beer pioneered commercial sturgeon and caviar production in the Delta region.

Family Farming in the Delta – Looking Back, Looking Forward

Steve Heringer is a fifth-generation Delta farmer. Since 1868, the Heringer family has grown pears, row crops such as corn, sugar beets, tomatoes, and more recently, wine grapes. Mr. Heringer speaks of the past, present and future of family farming in the Delta from a multi-generational perspective.

Roti Quesadilla? Punjabi-Mexican Culture in the Delta

• Dr. Karen Leonard of UC Irvine discusses the historic Punjabi-Mexican American community, a unique cultural (and culinary) fusion of early 20th-century immigrants in California’s Delta and Central Valley regions.
• Local culinary arts educator Nena Rasul describes the Punjabi/Mexican food traditions of her family.

Sweet Success + a Vintage Cake Tasting

Barbara Pagni Denton, author of the memoir/cookbook shares a vivid narrative of Crockett, a C&H Sugar company town, as it evolved in the 20th century.

• A collection of vintage cakes, whose recipes are shared in Denton’s book, will be served.

The History of Locke’s Chinese Demonstration Garden

Stuart Walthall, Chair of the Locke Foundation, discusses the profound role the community garden played in the life of Locke’s Chinese residents. He describes the legacy town’s present-day demonstration garden, which showcases vegetables, fruits and herbs grown by the original Chinese residents of Locke.

Closing remarks: Elizabeth Patterson, Chair, National Heritage Area Advisory Committee

The full event schedule is here and the speaker bios are here.

Tickets are $55 (plus an Eventbrite fee) and are available here. Tickets cover all food costs and seating is limited.

For more information about the Delta Heritage Forum or the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area, contact Kira O’Donnell, NHA information officer, kira.odonnell@delta.ca.gov, (530) 650-6362.

Read More

18 and 20 years after six votes of approval by council, commission

Contra Costa administrator’s office, fire chief oppose resolution of non-compliance on Tuesday’s agenda

“The proposed resolution relies on factual inaccuracies and faulty analysis in determining that the project is inconsistent with the five identified policies.” – Eric Angstadt, Chief Assistant County Administrator

“…regardless of the Planning Commission’s determination, the County can still proceed with the project as proposed.” – Brentwood City staff report for agenda item

By Allen D. Payton

The long-planned and approved East County Service Center (ECSC) in Brentwood is the first of three regional service centers to be constructed as directed in the County’s Capital Facilities Master Plan, which was adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors in September 2022. Yet, although it received six votes of approval by the Commission and City Council in 2006 and 2008 and has been under construction since spring, the Brentwood Planning Commission is set to vote on a resolution Tuesday night that claims “the project…does not substantially conform to the General Plan.”

But their own City staff says the project “can still proceed…as proposed.”

Item F.1. on the Commission’s agenda reads, “General Plan conformance review for the East County Service Center project, including Contra Costa County’s recent acquisition of a 5.06-acre parcel to include within the scope of the project, located south of Technology Way and west of Brentwood Boulevard. Title/Recommendation Adopt Resolution No. 26-013 finding the East County Service Center project, including Contra Costa County’s recent acquisition of a 5.06-acre parcel to include within the scope of the project, does not substantially conform to the General Plan.”

That is a result of the Commission’s vote during their meeting on Aug. 18, 2026. Even though, “Staff brought this item forward to the Planning Commission…with a recommendation to adopt a resolution determining that the East County Service Center project conforms to the General Plan,” based on six previous votes of the Commission and Brentwood City Council, the Commission instead directed staff to bring back the item to do just the opposite. Yet, the commissioners understood their vote to be “largely symbolic”.

According to the minutes of that meeting on a motion by Vice Chairperson Rod Flohr and seconded by Commissioner Jeremy Jones, the Commission voted 4-1 to direct staff to bring back a resolution finding that the East County Service Center project does not substantially conform to the General Plan or the Brentwood Boulevard Specific Plan, including inconsistencies related to circulation, land use, and noise.” Flohr and Jones were joined by Chairperson Kristopher Brand, who is a candidate in this year’s District 2 Council race, and Commissioner Anita Roberts. Only Commissioner Gerald Johnson, a 2024 candidate for mayor and former Brentwood Chamber of Commerce president, voted against the motion.

Zoning

According to the City staff report for Tuesday’s agenda item (see page 23), the seven parcels owned by the County are designated BP (Business Park) and BBSP (Mixed-Use COIR) in the City’s General Plan. They are zoned Zoning – PD-42 (Subarea F) and BBSP (Mixed-Use COIR) and the Surrounding Land Sses are North – Technology Way, across which is a shell light industrial building under construction and two vacant parcels East – Jack in the Box and Brentwood Boulevard, across which is the Sunset Plaza commercial development South – vacant parcel currently included in pending residential development application known as Emblem West – Business Center Drive, across which is the Coppergate townhomes and The Silvergate apartments.

Votes of Approval

Also, according to the staff report, there have been six votes of approval including four by the Commission and two by the Council, “since 2006, as follows:

• On February 21, 2006, the Planning Commission approved Design Review No. 05-15 and Minor Subdivision No. 351-06 for two shell commercial condominium buildings to be located on the six parcels along Technology Way;
• On March 28, 2006, the City Council approved Rezone No. 05-12 establishing development standards for the six parcels along Technology Way;
• On March 18, 2008, the Planning Commission approved one-year time extensions for Design Review No. 05-15 and Minor Subdivision No. 351-06;
• On May 19, 2009, the Planning Commission approved a two-year time extension for Design Review No. 05-15 and a one-year time extension for Minor Subdivision No. 351-06;
• On December 21, 2010, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 10 064 confirming that Contra Costa County’s acquisition of six parcels located along Technology Way for the future development of the “East County Government Center” project conformed to the General Plan; and
• On March 27, 2012, the City Council adopted the Brentwood Boulevard Specific Plan, which incorporated the parcel with frontage along Brentwood Boulevard Specific Plan.

Claims of Non-Conformance

But the four commissioners claimed, “the project did not conform to the General Plan for the following reasons:

• Inconsistency with Action LU 3b: “Concentrate major office uses along State Route 4 near the Lone Tree Way, Balfour Road, and Marsh Creek Road interchanges.” The project would be a regional facility and a major office use that should be near State Route 4.
• Inconsistency with Policy SA 3-5, which requires the City to ensure that all areas are accessible to emergency response providers. The building is proposed to be 50 feet tall and there is inadequate evidence in the record to demonstrate appropriate fire apparatus availability.
• Inconsistency with Policy LU I-4, which requires new development to occur in a logical and orderly manner focusing growth on infill locations. This project proposes a regional facility in mostly undeveloped area.
• Inconsistency with Policy LU 1-5, which encourages new development to be contiguous to existing development. This project proposes a regional facility in a mostly undeveloped area.

• Inconsistency with Policy LU 3-5, which requires the City to actively promote the Brentwood Boulevard Specific Plan. The Brentwood Boulevard Specific Plan’s COIR zoning designation assumes that 70% of the area will be High Density Residential uses, and this project does not propose any residential uses.

Background

It’s been 15 years in the process since the Board of Supervisors approved purchasing the 2.83-acre site along Technology Way for $1.3 million in January 2011. The County bought the two parcels where the building is under construction, when barely anything else was nearby, other than Los Medanos College was leasing a building there, near their former Technology Center on Sand Creek Road, which is why it was called Technology Way. It was also purchased before the Highway 4 bypass/extension was built between Lone Tree Way and Balfour Road.

The County bought the third parcel within the last year to allow for sufficient parking. Then the County added a third story which increased the costs but the cost per square foot decreased.

According to the project website, “The planned three-story, 117,000 square foot building, estimated to cost $155 million, will house up to 440 employees, bringing equitable access to essential services closer to the residents of East County. It will house nine County departments: Employment and Human Services, Health Services, Veterans Services, Clerk-Records Elections, Public Defender, District Attorney, Probation, Board of Supervisors, District III Office and Department of Information Technology.”

The County’s plans conform with the City’s General Plan. But the Planning Commission requested for it to come back even though it’s already under construction, with the walls having been erected and the second floor going up.

Construction on the building started in spring after the Phase 2 construction contract was awarded to Webcor on March 3, and the County officially broke ground on the site on March 31. It’s supposed to be completed by December 2027. According to the County’s Public Works Department in a post on their Facebook page last week, “Progress continues on the East County Service Center (ECSC) in Brentwood. This three-story, 117,000-square-foot facility will house multiple County departments providing services for East County residents.” The project’s webpage provides a current schedule of Construction Activities between Aug. 24 and Oct. 2.

County Responds Prior to Planning Commission Meeting

Ahead of Tuesday’s meeting, the County’s PIO, Kristi Jourdan wrote, “County planning staff, and previously Brentwood’s own planning staff, have already determined the project aligns with the City’s General Plan. The resolution being considered is based on several factual inaccuracies and misinterpretations of both planning practice and case law. Confire has also confirmed that emergency access to the building is fully supported.”

She also shared copies of an email dated Friday, Sept. 11 from Con Fire Chief Aaron McAlister to Chief Assistant County Administrator Eric Angstadt and a letter dated today, Monday, Sept. 14, from Angstadt to the Brentwood Planning Commission.

County Letter to Commission Claims Resolution Based on “Factual Inaccuracies…Faulty Analysis”

September 14, 2026

To the Brentwood City Planning Commission:

“The Planning Commission will consider, at its September 15, 2026 meeting, proposed Resolution No. 26-013 regarding the general plan conformity of the East County Service Center.  The Planning Commission should reject the proposed resolution.  Proposed Resolution No. 26-013 is factually incorrect, ignores relevant case law regarding general plan conformity, and, if adopted by the Planning Commission, would represent a failure of their duty to render unbiased opinions based on the City of Brentwood’s adopted plans and ordinances.

“In California, common professional planning practice supports, and relevant case law has repeatedly held, that a project need not be consistent with all General Plan policies to be considered in conformity with the General Plan.  A project conforms to the general plan “if, considering all its aspects, it will further the objectives and policies of the general plan and not obstruct their attainment.”  (Napa Citizens for Honest Government v. Napa County Bd. of Supervisors (2001) 91 Cal. App. 4th 342, 378.)  “A given project need not be in perfect conformity with each and every general plan policy.”  (Id.)  “The question is not whether there is a direct conflict between some mandatory provision of a general plan and some aspect of a project, but whether the project is compatible with, and does not frustrate, the general plan’s goals and policies.”  (Id.)

“In this instance, the professional planning staff of the City of Brentwood has twice found that development of the East County Service Center at its proposed location conforms with the City’s General Plan.  First, on December 21, 2010, City planning staff recommended and this same Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 10-064, determining that the County’s purchase of the original 6 parcels composing the project site for the stated purpose of developing an East County government center conforms with the City’s General Plan.  Second, on August 18, 2026, City planning staff again recommended a resolution determining that the proposed project conforms with the City’s General Plan.  The Planning Commission instead now considers a resolution of non-conformity based on their contention that the project is inconsistent with five policies, out of at least 365 polices maintained in the General Plan.  Even assuming that the project is inconsistent with the five identified policies, which the County disputes as detailed below, this represents only 1.37% of the General Plan policies.  The proposed determination of general plan non-conformity is contrived, inconsistent with professional planning practice and case law, and not supported by past City actions or evidence in the record.

“The proposed resolution relies on factual inaccuracies and faulty analysis in determining that the project is inconsistent with the five identified policies.

1. Action LU 3b – Concentrate major office uses along State Route 4.

The proposed project does not frustrate this policy.  Developing the project at its proposed location does not prevent, or even hinder, the City from concentrating major offices near State Route 4.  For major office uses actually under the City’s jurisdictional purview, the City is free to incentivize, authorize, prohibit, or take any other action within its land use authority to effectuate this policy.  Moreover, other elements of the General Plan, including the Brentwood Boulevard Specific Plan designation of COIR which applies to the project site, explicitly permit the proposed office use.

1. Policy SA 3-5 – Ensure all areas are accessible to emergency response providers.

The proposed resolution relies on a contrived rationale to question whether appropriate fire apparatus is available to serve the project.  The attached email from ConFire Chief Aaron McAlister confirms that a ladder truck is stationed at Fire station 92, 201 John Muir Parkway, that is capable of reaching all floors of the proposed building.  This project, as with all County building projects, are reviewed and approved by ConFire to ensure that appropriate fire protection facilities, apparatus, and personnel are available to serve the proposed building before construction begins.  Finally, as the Planning Commission is aware, ConFire has made a concerted effort to expand the fire facility network in East County and has several pending fire station projects in Brentwood.  Any actual concerns that the Planning Commission may have with respect to fire protection readiness in Brentwood can be addressed through the prompt and collaborative processing of those projects.

1. Policy LU I-4 – New development to occur in logical and orderly manner focusing on infill locations.

The proposed resolution relies on a factual inaccuracy that the project site is “in a mostly undeveloped area.”  The project is located on an undeveloped PARCEL surrounded on three contiguous sides by development, including housing to the west and commercial developments to the north and east.  Only the parcel to the south of the project site is undeveloped, but, as the City is aware, that parcel is currently in option for housing development.

1. Policy LU 1-5 – Encourage new development to be contiguous to existing development.

Again, the proposed resolution relies on a factual inaccuracy that the project location is “in a mostly undeveloped area.”  As described above, the project site is contiguous on three sides with existing development.  Moreover, within 450 feet to the north of the project site is an existing approximately 38,000 square foot office building, and within 700 feet is a nine-building office complex totaling around 140,000 square feet of office use.  Not only is the site contiguous with existing development, but it is also proximate to other major office developments.

1. Policy LU 3-5 – Actively promote the Brentwood Boulevard Specific Plan.

The proposed resolution misapplies the Brentwood Boulevard Specific Plan’s (BBSP) COIR designation by stating that it “assumes that 70% of the area will be High Density Residential uses, and this project does not propose any residential uses.”  This point is developed from the misreading of a footnote buried in a table on page 89 in the appendix of the BBSP.  That language does not appear in the text of BBSP at all and would not be considered a policy statement or action item.  Nevertheless, even if applicable, the language does not mean that the project is inconsistent with the BBSP.  The COIR district includes 108 acres.  The project site is 5 acres, or 4.63% of the COIR acreage, and does not prevent development of High Density Residential uses as assumed in the BBSP.  And, as discussed above, the BBSP COIR designation explicitly permits the proposed office use.

In conclusion, as has been extensively documented and detailed, the proposed resolution is contrary to the facts and contrary to the law.  I encourage any planning commissioner with questions or who are unclear on the details provided in this letter to contact me prior to taking action to approve the resolution on the Planning Commission’s agenda.

Sincerely,

Eric Angstadt, Chief Assistant County Administrator, Contra Costa County

Cc: Supervisor Diane Burgis, District 3, Monica Nino, County Administrator

Contra Costa Letter to Brentwood PC 091526 mtg

Fire Chief’s Email Assures Assistant County AdministratorService Can Be Provided to New Building

In an email last Friday, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Chief Aaron McAlister informed Angstadt that the District “reviewed the East County Service Center” and “has approved the structure.”

From: Aaron McAlister
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2026 1:30 PM
To: Eric Angstadt
Cc: TDutt; Nichols Sam (both of Con Fire)
Subject: East County Service Center

Dear Mr. Angstadt,

Regarding CONFIRE capabilities in East Contra Costa County, the Fire District deploys various units, including engines, ladder trucks, water tenders, wildland engines, and rescue units.  Following the annexation of East Contra Costa Fire, which became effective July 1, 2023, Contra Costa Fire implemented several enhancements.  First, paramedic service was introduced.  Initially, in a rolling implementation, within 6 months, all units in Brentwood, Oakley, and Discovery Bay had a paramedic and Advanced Life Support (ALS) equipment.  In April 2024, CON Fire deployed Truck 92 as a second resource, joining Engine 92, to Fire Station 92 at 201 John Muir Parkway, which is Brentwood’s only operating fire station today.  Before April 2024, Oakey and Brentwood had no ladder truck service, and those communities depended on mutual aid from Antioch.

Truck 92 in Brentwood is a 102-foot tractor-drawn aerial ladder used for rescue at multi-story buildings.  It is also equipped with an aerial water way for firefighting operations from the ladder and a full complement of EMS gear, rope rescue, ventilation equipment, and extrication equipment.  CON Fire ladder trucks are staffed with 4 personnel: a Captain, an Engineer, and two firefighters.  One of those four members is a paramedic.  A schematic drawing of our ladder truck is attached.

Fire Station 92 is 3.5 miles from the East County Service Center.  When Fire Station 90 is constructed and Lone Tree and Shady Willow, the Fire District intention is to relocate truck 92 to this new station when it will become truck 90.  Future Station 90 is 2.7 miles from the East County Service Center.  When Station 94 opens in January 2027, Station 94 will be located 1.0 mile from the East County Service Center.

CON Fire reviewed the East County Service Center under our normal plan review, development, and pre-fire engineering process.  CON Fire has approved the structure, which includes ladder truck access, engine access, water supply, and modern fire protection systems such as fire alarms and fire sprinklers.

Please feel free to contact me if I can clarify our capabilities.

Sincerely,

Aaron J. McAlister, Fire Chief, XCC Operational Area Coordinator, Contra Costa County Fire Prot. District

Con Fire Chief ltr to Brentwood PC 091526

Issue Part of Recall Effort Against Supervisor Burgis

The issue is part of an effort to recall District 3 County Supervisor Diane Burgis, which began earlier this year. The effort’s website claims, “The County advanced plans for the East County Community Service Center despite concerns that the proposed project did not comply with Brentwood’s city ordinances. Critics also objected to the County’s decision not to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Brentwood to ensure the project would be built in compliance with local ordinances. She used our tax dollars to go over budget by 25 million without any public notice.”

Then, in a blog post on that website which doesn’t identify the author, someone wrote, “The questions are how the project grew, what it costs, how the environmental review was handled and how much meaningful input Brentwood residents had before decisions were made,” and provides details for the complaints above, including traffic, plus, “impact on downtown Brentwood.”

Media Survey Shows Majority Public Support for Project

A survey conducted by The Press beginning Aug 20, 2026, and Updated Aug 30, 2026, asked, “Are you excited for the East County Service Center to come to Brentwood? Earlier this year, the Board of Supervisors broke ground on the county-funded East County Service Center off of Technology Way in Brentwood. While the county has called the project one that will bring jobs to Brentwood and reduce travel time for local residents in need of county services, city leaders have been skeptical of it, citing concerns over traffic and other factors. Are you excited for the project to open in late 2027?”

The results show 56.8% responded “Yes”, 38.5% of respondents said, “No” and 4.7% were undecided.

City Staff Says Project Can Proceed

Under the Environmental Determination for the agenda item, City staff wrote, “The City’s General Plan conformance review of the County’s acquisition of real property, as well as the location, purpose, and extent of the East County Service Center project, does not trigger review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as the review is advisory and nonbinding, and the City has no discretion in how the project is conducted. The request is only for review of the acquisition’s conformance to the General Plan, and regardless of the Planning Commission’s determination, the County can still proceed with the project as proposed.”

Meeting Details

The meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. inside the City Council Chambers at 150 City Park Way and can also be viewed and the public can participate by making comments via Zoom.

To learn more about the East County Service Center project, visit www.contracosta.ca.gov/eastcountyservicecenter

Read More