Contra Costa Herald

News Of By and For The People of Contra Costa County, California

Taxpayers Association president suggests merging Contra Costa bus agencies to save costs instead of tax increase

By Leave a Comment

By Marc Joffe

Bay Area transit agencies are seeking another half-cent sales tax in November. While most of the $980 million a year in new revenue will go to BART, Muni and AC Transit, smaller agencies will also receive extra tax money, evading the need to reform. Contra Costa County will continue to have multiple bus operators, including two sharing the territory east of the Caldecott. Before voters agree to pour more public money into this hodgepodge of agencies, they should ask whether there are opportunities for reform.

Central and Eastern Contra Costa County are currently split between two distinct bus agencies. Tri Delta Transit covers eastern communities like Antioch and Brentwood, while County Connection serves central hubs including Walnut Creek and Concord. Together, they cover a combined service area of more than 800,000 residents. Both feed riders into BART, yet they maintain completely separate executive teams, planning departments, procurement offices, and administrative staff. In 2024, these two agencies spent a combined $79.8 million to deliver 4.1 million bus rides at an average cost of $19.39 per trip—of which passenger fares covered just $1.33, leaving taxpayers to subsidize the remaining $18.07 per ride.

The financial unsustainability of this arrangement is glaring when looking at farebox recovery and utilization. Passenger fares cover just 7.8 percent of operating costs at County Connection and an even worse 5.5 percent at Tri Delta Transit, meaning taxpayers shoulder nearly the entire burden for systems where 40-foot buses frequently circulate with almost no one on board. The redundancy also affects riders, with Tri Delta’s Route 201X running deep into Concord and County Connection’s Route 93X crossing into Antioch.  Riders navigating this corridor face separate fare structures and schedules simply to preserve two entrenched bureaucracies where one would clearly suffice.

My recent California Policy Center analysis of the state’s 85 transit operators highlighted the need to consolidate smaller agencies to rein in administrative overhead, a problem acutely visible at County Connection. The agency employs 249 people directly and negotiates with three distinct labor unions, driving salaries and benefits to $28.7 million, which consumes 62 percent of its $46.4 million operating budget. Tri Delta Transit, conversely, demonstrates the fiscal advantages of leveraging private sector efficiencies. Rather than inflating a massive public payroll, Tri Delta contracts its bus operations to a private company, Transdev, keeping its own overhead lean while retaining fleet ownership. Tri Delta has also pioneered microtransit with its Tri MyRide app, recognizing that deploying a shared van is far more sensible than running a near-empty 40-foot bus on a fixed loop through low-density neighborhoods.

The perverse incentives of the current funding model guarantee that meaningful reform will be ignored in favor of demanding more tax revenue. Merging the two agencies under a single general manager and board, while competitively contracting all operations, could save millions in administrative, operating, and capital costs.

It is important to recognize that Contra Costa bus agencies are not providing a meaningful solution for climate change or congestion. Federal transit data cross-referenced with the Department of Energy’s Transportation Energy Data Book reveals that Contra Costa’s highly subsidized buses average just four passengers and burn 8,400 BTU of energy per passenger-mile, which is more than double the energy intensity of a typical SUV and triple that of a passenger car.  Furthermore, Google’s Environmental Insights Explorer indicates that buses account for a statistically insignificant 0.31 percent of all trips in the county, meaning that additional bus funding from the new sales tax won’t alleviate congestion on Interstate 680 or Highway 4.

Subsidized suburban transit should be viewed strictly as a social safety net for those who lack alternatives, not as a green infrastructure project or a cure for regional traffic. When voters go to the polls in November 2026, they should firmly reject the new sales tax measure. Until regional planners dismantle these redundant bureaucracies and implement competitive contracting across a unified eastern and central Contra Costa County transit network, taxpayers are merely subsidizing an inefficient status quo.

Marc Joffe is the President of the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association.

 

Steve Hilton’s CAL DOGE claims $370M for substance abuse education funneled to “Leftwing political activism”

By 1 Comment

“Califraudia” estimated at $250 billion of fraud, waste and abuse

By Jenny Rae Le Roux, Director, CAL DOGE

SACRAMENTO, CA — Today, CAL DOGE, the unofficial California Department of Government Efficiency, launched on Jan. 26th by candidates for governor, Steve Hilton and for state controller, Herb Morgan, announced it has untangled a web of funding from the Prop 64 (state marijuana legalization law) authorized California Cannabis Tax Fund (CCTF) – supposed to be used for substance abuse prevention – that instead is building the Democrat political machine in California.

An investigation into Elevate Youth California, which is one of the financial intermediaries that received $370M from the CCTF, found that Elevate Youth distributed 517 micro-grants, with an average grant size of $700K, to multiple organizations that do nothing related to substance abuse and instead build the Democrat voter base. These organizations explicitly fund “social justice youth development”, “civic engagement”, and “power building.”

According to Prop 64 and the supposed oversight group for Elevate Youth, The Center at Sierra Health Foundation, the tax is designated to support “funding and technical assistance for organizations that are developing or increasing community substance use disorder prevention, outreach and education focused on youth.” Instead, Elevate Youth is distributing funds to organizations – such as $1M for “civic engagement” to Young Invincibles, which has stated values of “Young Adult Power, Equity, Community, Collaboration, and Bold Ideas” but says and does nothing related to substance abuse prevention.

“After collecting $1 billion annually from the Cannabis Tax, that money should be spent on substance abuse prevention as stated in the law, not political organizing to keep Democrats in charge of California’s decline,” said Jenny Rae Le Roux, Director of CAL DOGE. “Funneling money through financial intermediaries to hundreds of non-profits that spend those funds on partisan Democrat political organizing must stop, and the age of accountability must begin.”

Other grantee organizations, such as the Jakara Movement Grant, which was provided $1M for Sikh youth empowerment and voter registration, and Asian Refugees United, which was granted $800K for LGBTQ+ Asian Storytelling, have no connection to substance abuse prevention.

Estimates $250 Billion of Fraud, Waste and Abuse

Based on a preliminary review by Hilton, and his running mate Morgan, entitled “Califraudia”, California’s exposure to fraud, waste, and abuse across major state programs is estimated at $250 billion. This estimate, based on independent analysis, underscores the urgent need for formal audits, investigations, and enforcement as a matter of basic fiscal responsibility.

Hilton added, “In seven days of work, CAL DOGE has already uncovered more fraud than Gavin Newsom and his regime have done in their seven years in power. And we’re not even elected yet! This is exactly why I set up CAL DOGE in the first place, to expose fraud and corruption in the system so we can act to stop it on day one. Democrats and their shadow network of leftist front organizations are stealing taxpayers’ money for their own partisan ends. We pay the highest taxes in the country yet get the worst results – and now we are finding out why, and where our money is really going. There is much more to come from CAL DOGE and its work will play a huge part in ending 16 years of Democrat one party rule this November.”

Following are additional details on the investigation and the team that connected the dots:

Californians Voted For the $370 Million in Cannabis Tax Dollars to Fund “Drug Prevention.” Instead, the Tax Bankrolls Leftwing Political Activism.

When California voters approved Proposition 64 in 2016, they were told cannabis tax revenue would fund youth substance abuse prevention. Six years and $370.25 million later, Rhetor’s AI-powered forensic audit — conducted in partnership with CalDOGE — reveals where that money actually went: into a sprawling network of 517 grants funding political organizing, voter registration drives and “social justice youth development,” all administered by a single nonprofit intermediary operating as a shadow agency of the state.

How the Money Moves

The California Department of Health Care Services does not distribute Proposition 64 cannabis tax funds directly to community organizations. Instead, they issue a master contract to The Center at Sierra Health Foundation, a 501(c)(3) that has become the de facto bank for the state’s equity, prevention and youth funding.

The Center at Sierra Health Foundation retains 15 to 20 percent in administrative fees then sub-grants the remaining funds to community-based organizations through its own application process.

The state does not pick who gets the grants. The intermediary does, bypassing the rigorous procurement processes mandated for direct government contracts under the Department of General Services and State Controller oversight.

The result is a three-stage pipeline — master contract to fiscal intermediary to sub-grants — that creates layers of separation between taxpayer dollars and their ultimate use.

Lining the Governor’s Pockets

The pipeline starts with the governor’s office, and the relationship between The Center at Sierra Health Foundation and the governor extends well beyond a standard contract. According to the California Fair Political Practices Commission’s Behested Payment Transparency Report (pg.19-20), in 2020 alone, Sierra Health Foundation was the third-largest payor of behested payments statewide at $14,747,724 and the single largest payee of behested payments statewide at $30,869,901 — payments Newsom solicited from private companies.

Newsom himself was the top behesting official in the state that year at $226.8 million total (pg. 20), and Sierra Health Foundation ranked among his top three financial partners in the system.

The financial trajectory of The Center at Sierra Health Foundation tracks accordingly. IRS Form 990 filings show The Center’s revenue exploded from $11.8 million in 2018 to $197 million in 2024 — with 96.5 percent of that revenue coming from government contracts. The Center’s CEO Chet Hewitt’s total compensation rose from $407,726 to $612,730 over the same period, a 50 percent increase that mirrors the growth in state contract volume almost perfectly. Behested payments are legal in California with no dollar limits, but the California Fair Political Practices Commission itself flagged the scale as concerning enough to implement new transparency regulations.

The Grants Say the Quiet Part Out Loud

The pipeline flows from the governor’s office to the The Center at Sierra Health Foundation, the fiscal intermediary, who determines grant recipients. Rather than awarding grants to recipients that qualify for Proposition 64’s original purpose — fighting substance abuse — The Center uses Prop. 64’s taxpayer dollars to fund leftwing activist organizations.

Elevate Youth, for example, the most significant vertical managed by The Center, is funded exclusively by Prop. 64 taxpayer dollars. Yet Elevate Youth’s grant application form explicitly names “social justice youth development” and “civic engagement” as criteria for grantees, terms that appear nowhere in the statutory language of Prop. 64’s Youth Education, Prevention, Early Intervention, and Treatment Account.

Similarly, grant recipients, like United Way of Santa Cruz County, which was awarded $834,075.00 from Elevate Youth, focuses on “activism” and “BILPOC (Black, Indigenous, Latino, and People of Color) and LGBTQ+ youth and families.”

Voters approved cannabis tax revenue for substance abuse prevention. DHCS redefined “prevention” to include political organizing — then buried it inside the grant criteria of a nonprofit intermediary most Californians have never heard of.

Political Activism at Clinical Prices

The math exposes the disconnect.

According to the DHCS YEPEITA report, the Elevate Youth program reached 89,727 participants. Divide $370.25 million by that figure and the cost per participant is $4,126.

Actual clinical substance abuse treatment costs between $2,000 and $5,000 per patient. Elevate Youth California is charging clinical-grade prices for non-clinical projects, including “civic engagement” workshops, leadership development seminars and “community mobilizing” training. These are not treatment programs. They are organizing programs priced like treatment programs.

The Receipts

Elevate Youth’s specific grant awards make the mislabeling undeniable.

Since 2020, the Jakara Movement has received $1.8 million for “Sikh youth empowerment and prevention.” Grant activities include voter registration drives. Under the program’s framework, registering voters is classified as substance abuse prevention.

Pacific Clinics received $1 million for its “Youth IMPACT Project” — designed to “strengthen the leadership skills” of immigrant youth and “mobilize people to achieve change.”

The Center does not hide its ideological aims. They are codified in its program descriptions. The San Joaquin Valley Health Fund lists “power building” and “civic engagement” as core pillars of its health equity strategy. The Center has funded partners to conduct door-to-door canvassing for the Census and voter registration — explicitly linking political capital to health outcomes.

Hidden in a Sea of Grants.

The $370.25 million was not distributed through a handful of large, auditable contracts. It was dispersed across 517 individual grants, averaging $716,150 each.

This fragmentation makes traditional auditing nearly impossible. No single grant is large enough to trigger intensive audit scrutiny. The dispersal prevents consolidated oversight of outcomes. And because The Center — not the state — manages the sub-granting process, no single state auditor has a comprehensive view of where the money lands or what it produces.

How Rhetor Found It

This is the kind of fraud pattern that manual auditors miss by design. When grants are deliberately fragmented across hundreds of recipients, the mislabeling only becomes visible at scale.

Rhetor’s AI analysis — deployed as part of its CAL DOGE partnership — cross-referenced RFA language, grant award descriptions, cost-per-participant calculations and program outcome reporting across the full portfolio of 517 grants. The pattern detection surfaced what no individual audit could: a systematic reclassification of political organizing as public health spending, replicated across hundreds of awards.

What This Means

Californians voted for youth drug prevention. They got a taxpayer-funded political organizing infrastructure — administered by an unelected nonprofit, shielded from procurement oversight and priced at clinical treatment rates for activities that have nothing to do with substance abuse.

The receipts are public. The grant guidelines are public. The cost-per-participant math is public. None of this was hidden. It was just fragmented enough that no one was supposed to connect the dots.

Rhetor and CAL DOGE connected them. The question now is whether Californians will act or wait until Sacramento sends the next $370 million into the same pipeline.

Note: The original figure cited for Elevate Youth’s funding for the Jakara Movement was $350,000. Our updated data found that Elevate Youth has granted $1.8 million to the Jakara Movement since 2020.

See CAL DOGE Elevate Youth report.

About CAL DOGE

The CAL DOGE team includes investigators, tech advisors and citizen journalists. If you have a tip, send it to Califraud.com, a secure whistleblower platform, paid for by the Steve Hilton for Governor 2026 campaign, that allows current and former state employees and members of the public to report fraud, waste, abuse and systemic mismanagement without fear of retaliation.

CAL DOGE, named after Elon Musk’s DOGE which was formed and worked to find wasteful spending, fraud and abuse in the federal government and disbanded last November, is not the same as California DOGE, started in Nov. 2024. The new effort publishes findings, tracks spending at the program level, and advances reform proposals to restore trust, lower costs, and make California government work again for the people who pay for it. For more information see https://caldoge.rhetor.ai.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Serve on the Contra Costa County Treasury Oversight Committee

By Leave a Comment

Application Deadline: March 5

By Contra Costa County Office of Communications & Media

(Martinez, CA) –  The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors is seeking individuals with sound knowledge and experience in the field of public and private finance, to serve on the Treasury Oversight Committee (Committee) for the seat representing the Alternate County Board of Supervisors, Public Representative Seat 1, and Public Representative Seat 2 for term May 1, 2026 to April 30, 2030.

The Board of Supervisors established the Committee on November 14, 1995. The Committee’s duties include reviewing and monitoring the County Treasurer’s Annual Investment Policy, and ensuring an annual audit is conducted to determine the County Treasurer is in compliance with Government Code §§27130-27137.

The annual audits, meeting agendas, and minutes of the Committee are available online: www.contracosta.ca.gov/690/Treasury-Oversight-Committee. Members of the Committee receive no compensation for their service.

To be considered, candidates must be County residents, may not be employed by an entity that has contributed to the reelection campaign of the County Treasurer or a member of the Board of Supervisors in the previous three years, may not directly or indirectly raise money for the County Treasurer or a member of the Board of Supervisors while a member of the Committee and may not work for bond underwriters, bond counsel, security brokerages or dealers, or financial services firms with whom the County Treasurer does business, either during his or her tenure on the Committee or for one year after leaving the Committee. (Government Code §27132.3).

The Committee meets bi-annually in March and September on the third Tuesday of the month at 3:00 p.m. at 625 Court St., Room B010, Martinez, CA 94553.  Each meeting lasts approximately one hour.

Application forms can be obtained from the Contra Costa County Clerk of the Board by calling (925) 655-2000 or by clicking on the following link: Submit an Application Online.  Applications should be returned to the Clerk of the Board, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, 1st Floor, Martinez, CA 94553 no later than Thursday, March 5, 2026, by 5 p.m.  Interviews will be held at the Internal Operations Committee (IOC) meeting, which will be conducted via Zoom at 10:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. on March 23, 2026.  More information about the Treasury Oversight Committee can be obtained by visiting the Treasurer-Tax Collector’s website at https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/690/Treasury-Oversight-Committee.

Contra Costa Supervisors vote 5-0 to place 5-year 5/8-cent sales tax increase on June ballot

By 1 Comment

To pay for healthcare costs, offsetting cuts in federal budget

If passed, sales tax rate in 10 of the 19 cities in the county would increase by 0.625% to over 10%

By Allen D. Payton

During their regular, weekly meeting on Tuesday, Feb. 10, 2026, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors decided to tell the taxpayers that they love our money by giving an early Valentine’s Day gift of a 5/8-cent sales tax increase measure on the June ballot. As a general tax, a simple majority of voters will have to give it their support in order to pass. If they do, it will generate an estimated $150 million per year for five years for a total of $750 million, intended to pay for healthcare for county residents impacted by federal budget cuts.

To adopt the sales tax ordinance a 4/5 vote of the Board was required but it passed unanimously. According to the proposed “2026 Retail Transactions (Sales) and Use Tax Ordinance”, all of the proceeds from the tax will be placed in the County’s general fund and used for purposes consistent with general fund expenditures of the County.

Screenshot of Board of Supervisors 5-0 vote on Tuesday, Feb. 10, 2026, to adopt resolution placing sales tax increase on the June 2026 ballot.

Timeline to the Supes Vote

In the staff presentation for the proposed ordinance, the supervisors were provided with the timeline of events that led up to their vote: On November 18, 2025, the County Administrator’s Office offered a presentation on the State Budget and impacts of H.R.1, known as the One Big Beautiful Bill, passed by Congress and signed into law by President Trump which cuts healthcare expenditures. Then, on December 16th, the Health, Employment and Human Services departments provided an in-depth presentation on federal and state financial impacts. That was followed on January 20th by Board direction for seeking legislation allowing for an additional 0.625% general sales tax and development of a related taxing ordinance for a period of five years. Finally, during last Tuesday, February 3rd’s Board Retreat, presentations from Beacon Economics, the County Finance Director, California Welfare Director’s Association (CWDA) and the California Association of Public Hospitals & Health Systems (CAPH) were made to the Board.

Projected Sales Tax Levels by City

If the measure passes, the amount of sales tax collected in each city in the county will increase by 0.625% or 62.5 cents for each $100 spent on taxable items. The presentation shows the sales tax increase would cause 15 of the 19 cities in the county to be above the local sales tax cap, including the tax cap changes from SB1349. That law, passed in 2020, allowed Contra Costa County to impose a sales tax of up to 0.5% for transportation projects, which is exempt from the state’s 2% cap. According to an April 2025 Issue Brief on Sales and Use Tax by the California State Association of Counties, “Today, the statewide sales tax rate on eligible taxable goods is 7.25%.”

According to the CA Department of Tax and Fee Administration, “The…7.25%…is made up of three parts:

  • 6.00% State
  • 1.00% Local Jurisdiction
  • 0.25% Local Transportation Fund

Some components of the state rate go to various local revenue funds.”

In addition, “Cities may impose a rate of up to one percent (1%).”

In California, the local sales tax cap is generally set at 3.5% above the 6% state sales tax rate for a total of 9.5%.

Following is the list of the new sales tax amounts by city if the county measure passes:

Source: Contra Costa County

The cities with the highest current sales tax rates in the state are Alameda and Albany at 10.75%. With the proposed Contra Costa sales tax increase, El Cerrito and Pinole would have the highest sales tax rate in both the county and state at 10.875%. Antioch would have the second highest in the county at 10.375%. That does not include other sales taxes that may be passed in 2026 including the regional transit tax slated for the November 2026 ballot, which would be an additional 0.5% Countywide. (See related article)

Gioia Offers Comments on Facebook, in TV Interview

In a post by John Gioia on his Facebook page, today, Feb. 11th, he shared a video of his comments during a KTVU FOX2 interview “about why a unanimous bi-partisan Board of Supervisors is placing a 5/8 cent temporary 5-year sales tax on this June’s ballot to protect our county’s hard working families from Trump’s devastating health, human services and food assistance cuts.”

“The average Contra Costan would pay about $10 per month to prevent over 50,000 people from losing healthcare and crowding emergency rooms that we all use and protecting emergency response times,” he added.

Resolution Details

The Resolution adopted by the Board includes the following clauses, “On July 4, 2025, the President signed H.R. 1, which enacted the deepest cuts in our country’s history to Medicaid and the federal food assistance programs;

“Medicaid and Medicare are the largest sources of revenue for the County’s public health and hospital/clinic system, which provide lifesaving and essential care to county residents, including Medi-Cal beneficiaries, Medicare recipients, and uninsured residents.

“H.R. 1 immediately freezes supplemental Medicaid funding and blocks the County from drawing down expected supplemental payments, producing escalating negative impacts on the County’s budget, while simultaneously making significant eligibility changes which will cause thousands of county residents to lose health coverage;

“Lack of health coverage often causes people to delay medical care resulting in sicker residents and will increase demand for emergency care sought by residents no longer able to access preventative healthcare after losing insurance coverage;

“More than 335,000 County residents rely on Medi-Cal for their health care, and the County is the primary health-care provider for this population;

“H.R. 1 also makes substantial reductions to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), limiting food assistance relied upon by approximately 110,000 county residents;

“As a result of the federal funding cuts and rising costs, the County projects annual revenue losses exceeding $300 million by 2029;

“The combination of decreased federal funding with the increased demands on the County’s healthcare and social services threatens ALL County services, from public safety to homeless services;

“An additional five-eighths of one cent countywide general transaction and use tax (sales tax) would generate an estimated $150 million annually for five years…”

Adopted Proposed Ballot Measure Language

The resolution also includes the proposed ballot measure language pending approval by the County Clerk’s Office:

“To help Contra Costa County address deep cuts in federal funding; support critical local services such as health care, supplemental food assistance, and other general county services; and reduce the risk of closures at Contra Costa’s regional hospital and health clinics, shall Contra Costa County adopt a five-eighths of one cent general sales tax for 5 years, providing an estimated $150,000,000 annually, not available to the federal government and subject to annual audits and independent citizens oversight?”

The primary election will be held Tuesday, June 2, 2026.

For more details see Discussion Item D.2. on the Board Agenda for their meeting on Feb. 10, 2026, and watch the meeting video beginning at the 2:20:18-minute mark.

Guest Commentary: There are better alternatives to BART’s cutback plan

By 2 Comments

“They should go back to the drawing board and give us a cost savings plan that demands more sacrifice from BART management, senior staff, and retirees.”

By Marc Joffe

BART has published a plan to balance its budget in the event voters reject the half-cent additional transit sales tax slated for the November 2026 ballot. BART’s plan appears to be well thought out but imposes far more inconvenience on riders than is necessary to close an expected $376 million deficit.

The most visible change is the station closures. Under its more extreme Phase 2 plan, BART would close 15 stations systemwide, including these five in Contra Costa: Orinda, North Concord, Pittsburg Bay Point, Pittsburg Center, and Antioch. Oakland Airport station would close, but SFO would stay open. Five other stations in Alameda County south of Oakland would be shuttered, as would four stations in San Mateo County south of Daly City. (See related article)

But most of these stations should not close. As BART itself recognizes, the savings from shuttering stations are not that large. And there is an alternative that would achieve a large portion of the expected savings, which is to operate the stations on an unstaffed basis. This idea may seem strange to BART riders expecting to see a station agent, but the fact is that many train stations in California operate without staff, including several on Capitol Corridor and Caltrain. Even Pittsburg Center on e-BART often operates without staff.

That said, both Pittsburg Center and North Concord have very low utilization (less than 1000 riders on an average weekday) and are reasonable candidates for closure. Indeed, BART should demolish the North Concord station and sell the parking lot to a developer for conversion to single family housing, a use consistent with the adjoining neighborhood.

Pittsburg Center, being in the median of Highway 4, does not offer a similar redevelopment option. It is one of three stations on the eBART extension connecting Antioch, Pittsburg and Bay Point using standard-gauge diesel multiple-unit trains which are incompatible with the rest of BART. The BART retrenchment plan envisions closing the whole eBART extension. A better choice would be to find a private operator to take it over.

That operator should be given discretion over fares and the option to convert the line to driverless technology in hopes of achieving a profit or at least minimizing the need for taxpayer subsidies.

As anyone who has visited an airport in the last few decades knows, driverless trains are nothing new. Outside the Bay Area, they are used for non-airport systems such as Honolulu’s Skyline and Vancouver’s Skytrain. Paris, Singapore, and other cities have successfully converted some of their lines to autonomous operation and Washington DC’s Metro is looking into doing the same thing.

Over the longer term, the entire BART system should be driverless: it could achieve large operational cost savings while maintaining or even increasing service frequency. Yet BART is not giving serious consideration to transitioning to driverless trains. When BART Director Matt Rinn spoke to CoCoTax in November I asked him about the idea and saw that he was unfamiliar with it. Staff should be discussing this option with the governing board.

They don’t do so because BART operates primarily for the benefit of staff and the labor unions that collect a portion of their salaries via dues. Riders are second, and taxpayers are a distant third.

Contra Costa taxpayers already pay plenty for transit, and, this November, it is time for us to tell BART and other agencies “no more.” They should go back to the drawing board and give us a cost savings plan that demands more sacrifice from BART management, senior staff, and retirees.

One change that should be considered is a 10% salary reduction for all BART employees receiving over $100,000 per year. Based on my analysis of 2024 wage and overtime data, this option would save $54 million. Costly overtime hours should also be limited: in 2024 alone five BART employees collected over $200,000 in overtime a piece.

BART’s plan defers advanced payments for retiree health benefits. This saves $38 million, but only by pushing the cost onto future taxpayers when the fund holding the advance retiree health funding is exhausted. Instead, the BART retiree health benefit should be eliminated just as it was for Stockton employees when that city went bankrupt in 2012. With BART facing functional bankruptcy in 2026, a similar economy is needed. Retirees can get subsidized healthcare through Covered California or Medicare just as those of us who work in the private sector usually do.

Salary and benefit cuts in addition to the layoffs BART already has planned may seem harsh, but these are the types of reductions companies have to make when they are losing money and there is less demand for their product. Because BART now needs more of our money, we have the power to veto any cost-saving plan that fails to prioritize the needs of beleaguered taxpayers and riders. Let’s exercise that veto. In November, say NO to the transit sales tax.

Marc Joffe is the President of the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association

BART Board to be presented with plans for station, segment closures by Jan., July 2027

By 2 Comments

Source: BART

If new funding not identified such as if Nov. 2026 ballot measure sales tax increase doesn’t pass

East Contra Costa, North Concord, Orinda Stations could be shuttered

By BART

At the annual BART Board Workshop on Thursday, February 12, BART staff will present Directors with detailed plans for an alternative service framework if a November 2026 ballot measure fails and no other operating revenue source is identified. 10 stations could be closed by January 2027 and three segments by July 2027.

During the workshop, staff will outline the risks and tradeoffs for service and non-service reductions. Because rail has high fixed costs and low marginal savings, it is impossible to close the projected FY27 $376M deficit with service cuts and fare increases alone.

BART staff evaluated multiple aspects of service including routes, stations, headways, peak, evening, and weekend service and hours of operation. The proposed framework outlines, for the very first time, specific details including which stations would need to be closed due to a lack of operating funds and the recommended phased approach to triggering further cuts. The plan retains as many riders as possible, while still cutting service to realize savings. System support services would need to be reduced by 40% as cost savings from cutting service would be largely offset by the resulting lost fare revenue.

Source: BART

Phase 1 – North Concord, Orinda, Pittsburg Center Stations Would Close

The stations on the list for potential Phase 1 closure in January 2027 include the 10 lowest ridership stations: North Concord, Orinda, Pittsburg Center, Oakland International Airport, West Dublin/Pleasanton, Castro Valley, San Bruno, South Hayward, South San Francisco and Warm Springs/South Fremont.

In addition, the proposed Phase 1 proposal includes Service Frequencies of a 63% reduction in train hours; Reduced base schedule: 3-line base schedule each with 2 trains/hour and 240% more transfers (Percentage of trips requiring a transfer increases from 7% to 22%); Test retaining peak service: Peak Green/Red/Yellow trains operate in peak hours/direction only; and No evening service: the lines would Close at 9 PM (7 days) and Open at 8 AM (Saturday and Sunday).

Source: BART

Phase 2 – Yellow Line Service Would End at Concord Station, Pittsburg/Bay Point & Antioch Stations Would Close

The Phase 2 – July 2027: Segment Closure Scenario, Contingent on Phase 1 implementation, would result in a 70% reduction in train hours and 25% reduction in system miles; Segment closures would stop service on most system segments opened after 1976: Yellow line service would end at Concord, shuttering the Pittsburg/Bay Point and Antioch Stations; Orange line service would end at Bay Fair,; Blue line service would be discontinued shuttering the West Dublin/Pleasanton Station; Most stations south of Daly City would be closed except for direct service to SFO would continue for revenue retention; Service continues to Milpitas and Berryessa due to terms of BART/VTA agreements.

Board Vote Scheduled for Feb. 26 Meeting

There will not be a Board vote at the workshop on February 12. After receiving feedback from Directors at the workshop, staff plans to return to the Board on Thursday, February 26, with a resolution to adopt a finalized alternative service framework that would be implemented if new funding is not secured.

You can read the full presentation here.

You can participate in the workshop. You may join in person (2150 Webster Street, Oakland, CA 94612) or via Zoom videoconferencing (https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89025424156).

Written comments may be addressed to the BART Board in advance via email to Board.Meeting@BART.gov, using “public comment” as the subject line, before 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday, February 11th.

 

Supervisor Gioia announces $1 million grant program for non-profits to improve West Contra Costa

By Leave a Comment

Photo source: Office of Supervisor John Gioia

Anuncian un programa de subvenciones de 1 millón de dólares para mejorar la equidad en West Contra Costa

Application Deadline: February 27, 2026

Las solicitudes de subvención vencen en febrero 27, 2026

WHAT: Up to $50,000 grants for local nonprofits to improve equity in West Contra Costa County

WHEN: Applications open from February 1 through February 27, 2026

WHY:  Support innovative and impactful work to reduce health and economic disparities in West County

By Contra Costa County District 1 Supervisor John Gioia

I’m pleased to announce the opening of a Community Impact Fund Grant Program for Supervisorial District One. This program provides $1 million to support important projects that advance equity and reduce health and economic disparities in West Contra Costa County.

Grant amounts will be up to $50,000 each!

This grant program was established by the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors in June 2025, allocating $5 million countywide, with $1 million designated for each Supervisorial District. The goal is to invest in initiatives that strengthen community well-being and create long-term benefits for residents.

Our community shaped this grant program through ideas and priorities expressed at several Townhall meetings we held throughout West County. These funds will be used to improve health, housing, education, economic and environmental needs to achieve greater equity and reduce disparities.

Together, we’re building a stronger and more resilient future for all residents.

Nonprofit community-based groups are invited to apply for grant funds. Applications must be completed and submitted by Friday, February 27. Grant awards will be made by the end of March 2026.

This Grant Program was shaped by robust community input, including five town halls and a focus group, engaging over 275 residents, youth, organizational leaders, and advocates across District 1 in West Contra Costa County. These sessions provided a roadmap for equitable investments, emphasizing health, education, housing, economic and environmental improvements. Residents also called for transparency, local control, and sustainability.

To see the final report from the community Townhalls, please click here.

For more information on this grant program and how to apply, click here.

Español

QUÉ: Un millón de dólares en subvenciones para organizaciones sin fines de lucro locales con el fin de mejorar la equidad en el condado de West Contra Costa.

CUÁNDO: Las solicitudes estarán abiertas del 1 al 27 de febrero de 2026.

POR QUÉ: Para apoyar iniciativas innovadoras y de gran impacto que reduzcan las desigualdades en salud y economía en el oeste del condado.

Me complace anunciar la apertura del Programa de Subvenciones del Fondo de Impacto Comunitario para el Distrito Uno. Este programa destina 1 millón de dólares a apoyar proyectos importantes que promuevan la equidad y reduzcan las desigualdades sanitarias y económicas en el oeste del condado de Contra Costa.

¡El monto de las subvenciones será de hasta $50,000 cada una!

Este programa de subvenciones fue establecido por la Junta de Supervisores de Contra Costa en junio de 2025, asignando $5 millones para todo el condado, con $1 millón destinado a cada distrito supervisorial. El objetivo es invertir en iniciativas que fortalezcan el bienestar de la comunidad y generen beneficios a largo plazo para los residentes.

Nuestra comunidad dio forma a este programa de subvenciones a través de las ideas y prioridades expresadas en varias reuniones comunitarias que celebramos en todo el oeste del condado. Estos fondos se utilizarán para mejorar la salud, la vivienda, la educación, la economía y el medio ambiente, con el fin de lograr una mayor equidad y reducir las desigualdades.

Juntos, estamos construyendo un futuro más sólido y resiliente para todos los residentes.

Se invita a las organizaciones comunitarias sin fines de lucro a solicitar fondos de subvención. Las solicitudes deben completarse y presentarse a más tardar el viernes 27 de febrero. La adjudicación de las subvenciones se realizará a finales de marzo de 2026.

Este programa de subvenciones se diseñó con una sólida participación de la comunidad, incluyendo cinco asambleas públicas y un grupo focal, en los que participaron más de 275 residentes, jóvenes, líderes de organizaciones y activistas del Distrito 1 del condado de West Contra Costa. Estas sesiones proporcionaron una hoja de ruta para inversiones equitativas, haciendo hincapié en la salud, la educación, la vivienda y las mejoras económicas y ambientales. Los residentes también solicitaron transparencia, control local y sostenibilidad.

Para consultar el informe final de las reuniones comunitarias, haga clic aquí.

Para obtener más información sobre este programa de subvenciones y cómo solicitarlo, haga clic aquí.

Agreement reached on $590 million loan for Bay Area transit agencies

By Leave a Comment

Benefits AC Transit, BART in Contra Costa County

Provides “fiscal bridge” until revenue from possible 5-county sales tax increase measure on November ballot kicks in

By Rebecca Long, Director, Legislation & Public Affairs and John Goodwin, Assistant Director of Communications, Metropolitan Transportation Commission

SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 30, 2026… The Office of Governor Newsom, the California Department of Finance and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) on Friday reached an agreement on a $590 million loan for Bay Area transit agencies that will avert major service cuts at AC Transit, BART, Caltrain and SF Muni during the 2026-27 fiscal year that begins July 1. Negotiated in close coordination with the affected transit agencies — which together face a projected deficit of more than $800 million in the next fiscal year — the new agreement will sustain operations used by hundreds of thousands of daily transit riders across the region.

“California is following through in our support for Bay Area transit and the riders who rely on it every day,” said Gov. Newsom. “This agreement between my Administration and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission provides essential short-term financing to support Bay Area transit operations while the region works together on long-term funding solutions. Public transit is essential to our economy and to communities across California, and through continued partnership with regional and local agencies, we are delivering a more stable and reliable system – now and for the future.”

A regional funding measure authorized by the Legislature last year via state Senate Bill 63, authored by senators Scott Wiener of San Francisco and Jesse Arreguín of Berkeley, may appear on the November 2026 ballot in Contra Costa, Alameda, San Francisco, San Mateo and Santa Clara counties. If the measure qualifies for the ballot and is approved by voters, it would establish a temporary 14-year sales tax to support transit operations. But these funds would not begin flowing until around July 1, 2027. The state loan provides a fiscal bridge until the sales tax dollars potentially could be available. (See related articles here and here)

“Today is a huge win for Bay Area transit and for both transit riders and drivers,” said Sen.  Wiener. “For the past year, we’ve worked hard to craft a bridge loan to ensure BART, Muni, Caltrain and AC Transit are not forced to enact massive service cuts — potentially going into a death spiral — as we build toward a regional revenue measure to stabilize and strengthen these systems for the long run. I’m proud of our work with regional stakeholders and the Governor to make this loan a reality. Public transportation is part of the Bay Area’s lifeblood, and we must do everything in our power to strengthen it and protect it from service cuts. So many Bay Area residents rely on transit to get to work, school, or family, and service cuts would also explode traffic congestion. We must not let this happen, and we won’t let it happen.”

Today’s agreement authorizes the loan to be funded no later than July 1, 2026, using money awarded but not yet allocated for Bay Area projects by the California Transportation Commission through the state Transit Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP). Because many transit capital projects have long construction timelines and the TIRCP is continuously replenished, the loan is structured to uphold the state’s commitments to awarded projects while minimizing risk to project schedules.

“MTC greatly appreciates the time and energy the Department of Finance and the Governor’s office put into this loan negotiation,” said Commission Chair Sue Noack, who represents Contra Costa County and also serves as mayor of Pleasant Hill. “It was critical to reach agreement on funding that would avert major service cuts this year while also protecting the Bay Area’s priority capital projects and this agreement does just that.”

Consistent with state Senate Bill 105 enacted last fall, the loan agreement includes a clearly defined repayment structure, a guaranteed revenue source to secure the loan and an agreed-upon interest rate:

  • 12-year repayment term, with interest-only payments during the first two years.
  • Repayment secured by the “revenue-based” portion of State Transit Assistance (STA) that goes directly to the transit agencies.
  • Variable interest rate tied to the state’s Surplus Money Investment Fund, ensuring the state is fully repaid at the same rate it would have earned had the funds remained in state accounts.

BART General Manager Bob Powers noted that his agency, “is currently developing detailed budget plans for two funding scenarios to close our projected $376 million operating deficit for Fiscal Year 2027 through either new revenue and efficiencies or through service reductions, station closures, fare increases, layoffs, and across-the-board internal cuts. A state loan gives us reassurance money will be available to continue to deliver the best service possible for the Bay Area. We are thankful to Governor Newsom and the Department of Finance for finding a path to fund transit operations during such an unprecedented scenario brought on by the pandemic and remote work. We also thank the Bay Area Legislative Caucus for their supportive efforts and look forward to working with the Legislature on early action to include the loan within the state budget.”

“This bridge loan will help us maintain Muni service for one crucial year for everyone who depends on transit to get where they need to go,” said Julie Kirschbaum, Director of Transportation at the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, which operates Muni. “We thank the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for its leadership and the Governor and the Department of Finance for their collaboration. We are deeply appreciative of the tireless efforts of Mayor Daniel Lurie, State Senator Scott Wiener, State Senator Jesse Arreguín, the Bay Area Legislative Caucus, the Board of Supervisors and the transit advocates who kept this loan alive last year. With this key agreement completed, securing the additional funding we need to address our ongoing deficit is the critical priority.”

“San Francisco’s recovery is essential to the success of our region and our state,” noted Mayor Daniel Lurie. “Our city cannot continue its comeback without a safe, reliable transit system. This agreement is a major step forward towards securing the bridge loan needed to sustain our comeback and ensure transit systems can continue serving the families, seniors, students, and workers who rely on them every day. We’re already delivering greater accountability and efficiency for Muni, and ridership is continuing to climb toward pre-pandemic levels. I’m grateful to our partners at MTC and Governor Newsom for finalizing the agreement and prioritizing our city and our region’s recovery.”

Caltrain General Manager Michelle Bouchard made a similar point, “We are so grateful to the Governor, our delegation members, and our state and regional partners for stepping in and supporting public transit in the Bay Area at this critical time. This loan will allow us to preserve the service that made Caltrain the fastest growing transit agency in the U.S.”

“For 65 years, AC Transit’s north star has been delivering safe, reliable, and affordable bus service to the East Bay,” said Salvador Llamas, AC Transit General Manager and CEO. “That legacy was put at risk by unprecedented pandemic-related budget shortfalls. This state loan safeguards existing service levels and brings immediate relief to the more than 3 million riders each month who were at risk of losing some of the service they rely upon for the essentials of life. We thank Governor Newsom and our local and state partners for making this possible, and while long-term funding challenges remain, today we celebrate a critical win for our riders and communities.”

Senate Bill 63 co-author Jesse Arreguín also sounded a note of thanks, “I am grateful to the Governor and my legislative colleagues for supporting Bay Area transit with this loan. This agreement is a huge win to keep our transit agencies running and ensure that the Bay Area can continue as a major economic engine, while not compromising critical transit projects. At a time when we are at risk of significant service cuts that would grind the region to a halt, this additional funding will provide a vital lifeline to the Bay Area’s major transit agencies and provide fiscal stability as we move forward on a broader regional self-help measure this year.”

Contra Costa Sheriff’s Office Forensic Services Division receives state grant to help keep roads safe

By Leave a Comment

Photo: CCC Sheriff’s Office

$170,000 for Crime Lab

By Jimmy Lee, Director of Public Affairs, Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff

The Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff Forensic Services Division (FSD), a nationally accredited crime laboratory, has been awarded a competitive one-year grant of $170,000 to help keep our roadways safe from impaired drivers. Funding for this program was provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

The FSD will use the funding to support the testing program for detecting alcohol and drugs in driving under the influence (DUI) cases. New equipment will be purchased to enhance the analysis of alcohol and other volatile substances in DUI cases. Supplies will also be purchased to support comprehensive analysis and enable detection of illegal, prescription, and over-the-counter drugs commonly found in DUI cases. Funding for the pro-grams runs through September 2026.

“This grant will improve testing capabilities, analysis, and turnaround times at the Forensic Services Division,” said Contra Costa Sheriff David Livingston. “Having rapid results will benefit county law enforcement agencies and prosecutors and improve public safety.”

CA Office of Traffic Safety awards Contra Costa DA’s Office over $300k grant for DUI Prosecution Team

By Leave a Comment

By Ted Asregadoo, PIO, Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office

Martinez, California – The Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office received a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) of $323,500 to support a specialized prosecution team dedicated to alcohol and drug-impaired driving cases.

“We are grateful for this grant, which will allow us to focus specifically on holding individuals accountable for impaired driving and making the roads in our community safer for everyone,” District Attorney Diana Becton said. “Driving Under the Influence remains a significant danger on our roads. This funding strengthens our commitment to improving road safety and making sure justice is served effectively and efficiently.”

The specialized prosecution team will also partner with the statewide Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor Training Program (TSRP) to train other prosecutors and investigators and collaborate with law enforcement agencies on best practices for handling and managing driving under the influence (DUI) cases.

“Through focused prosecution efforts and strong partnerships, we are working toward a future where all people will be safe on California roads,” OTS Director Stephanie Dougherty said. “Together, we’re holding impaired drivers accountable and encouraging safe, responsible choices that help build a culture where safety comes first.”

This is the first year the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office has received funding from the OTS for a specialized DUI prosecution program. The grant program runs through September 2026.

Funding for this program was provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.