Contra Costa Herald

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

Pittsburg Council to hold vote on 45-day data center moratorium Oct. 26

By 1 Comment

AVAIO Digital data center rendering and Mayor Dionne Adams official photo. Source: City of Pittsburg

PITTSBURG, CA — Mayor Dionne Adams issued the following statement today, Thursday, Oct. 22, 2026:

On Monday, October 26, the Pittsburg City Council will consider a 45-day emergency moratorium on future data center development, including Phases II and III of the AVAIO project. This follows months of residents speaking up, asking questions and sharing concerns about what data centers mean for their families and neighborhoods.

Although my employer’s involvement has required me to recuse myself from recent project-related decisions, my responsibility to listen to residents and help ensure their questions are answered has remained central to my work as Mayor.

For the last few months, I directed the City Manager and staff to expand their outreach across the City, online and in-person, and called for a dedicated Council meeting focused entirely on data centers – where the creation of a community advisory council followed. More recently, I’ve routinely requested formal updates from the City Manager to the public, all of this ultimately leading to the upcoming moratorium vote.

The City’s advisory council is currently developing recommendations for future data center policies, and the Council’s upcoming moratorium vote will enable council to complete that work.

Pittsburg is my home, too. As our understanding of data centers and AI infrastructure evolves, we have a responsibility to keep learning and responding to the people whose lives and neighborhoods are affected. I won’t get every decision right, but I will always listen, take your concerns seriously, and do what I believe is in the best interests of Pittsburg and its residents, even when I cannot vote on every individual item.

To everyone who has taken the time to speak with me, attend a meeting or ask a difficult question: thank you. You deserve a City government that hears you and responds.

Monday’s meeting agenda has not yet been published on the City’s website. Please check the Agendas and Minutes page, later, here: Pittsburg, CA – Agendas & Minutes.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Embattled Brentwood city manager Duffey resigns

By 1 Comment

While still Brentwood City Manager, Harold Duffey speaks at the Brentwood City Council meeting on Oct. 5, 2026. Video screenshot

Paid 4 months of salary and benefits

Council possibly violates state open meeting law process

By Allen D. Payton

At the beginning of the special meeting about pickleball courts on Monday, Oct. 19, 2020, Brentwood Mayor Susannah Meyer announced the resignation of City Manager G. Harold Duffey that had was effective, last Friday, Oct. 16th, after little over a year in the position.

It was announced on Oct. 5, 2025, that the council planned to hire Duffey on Oct. 28th which they did. He had been working as the Assistant City Administrator in Oakland. Then in June, after text messages were released out of the City of Oakland involving Duffey and then Oakland City Administrator Jestin Johnson, according to a ContraCosta.news report, Duffey was placed on paid leave.

According to a Contra Costa Pulse report, “Duffey has faced allegations from Brentwood employees regarding gender-based discrimination and unprofessional conduct. Letters from multiple employee associations highlighted concerns about his treatment of women in the workplace and referenced prior ‘degrading and unprofessional’ text messages from his time in Oakland. Employees requested that Duffey be placed on administrative leave while an independent investigation is conducted.”

Duffey Did Not Request to Have Complaints & Charges Lodged Against Him During Special Council Meeting

Then at the special council meeting on October 5th, under Item D.1, the Council was prepared to hold a “Hearing of Specific Complaints or Charges Against a Public Employee (If requested, pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(2))” with the description, “If requested by the affected employee…hear the specific complaints or charges against the employee in open session.” But Duffey, “the affected employee” chose not to. Following a delay in the meeting while awaiting Duffey’s request or response, Teresa Fairbanks, the City’s Interim Human Resources Director and Risk Manager, announced, “The affected public employee is not requesting to have the specific complaints or charges against him be heard in open session.” Instead, they were dealt with in Closed Session.

Then, in his defense, Duffey spoke from the podium where residents and others offer their public comments defending himself and pleading for his job. He said, “I do love the city of Brentwood and I really enjoyed, enjoy working for the city of Brentwood. So, I do want to say remember how I came in and remember over the last nine months, what you have been able to accomplish and the energy and how you moved the city forward.”

“I just want to remind the council that under my contract, please read the contract, there is 8.4. that simply says ‘good cause’ and if you find there’s something that I’ve done requires a good cause dismissal, there is a cure for that. And that cure is a 30-day notice for correction and if correction doesn’t occur, then you can terminate,” he stated.

“Also, you have the…’without cause’ or ‘no cause’. That is an easier method, but I do ask you to remember the record that you have established,” Duffey continued.  “I wish the city of Brentwood no harm, I as a city manager always recognize there is a relationship that we have. If the relationship doesn’t work for the parties, we leave amicably. As I said, I love the city of Brentwood. I cherish my relationship with each one of you. You bring energy and excitement to the table. And with that..” he ran out of time of the two minutes the mayor allotted to each public speaker. (See 18:43 mark of meeting video)

The Brentwood Council Meetings list on the City’s website for October 2026 does not show the Closed Session meeting held on Friday, Oct. 16th. Screenshot source: City of Brentwood

Report Out from Closed Session

At Monday’s meeting Meyer said, “I’d like to provide a report out from our Closed Session meeting. I’m going to report out from our meeting on Oct. 16, 2026, on the resignation of G. Harold Duffey as city manager in an action taken by the city council in Closed Session. On Oct. 16, 2026, Mr. Duffey submitted his written, voluntary and unconditional resignation from his position as city manager effective that same day.”

“At a Closed Session held on Oct. 5, 2026, the City Council authorized me to execute a separation and general release agreement with Mr. Duffey. The motion was made by Councilmember Mendoza and seconded by Councilmember Orlemans. The motion passed unanimously.”

“Under the agreement the City will pay Mr. Duffey $104,550.13 in settlement compensation equivalent to four months of salary, plus, $19,702.22 for accrued unused vacation and personal leave for a total gross amount of $124,252.35.

In exchange, Mr. Duffey agreed to a general release of claims arising from his employment with and separation from the City. Mr. Duffey and I executed the separation and general release agreement Oct. 16, 2026. That concludes my report.”

However, following the Closed Session meeting on Oct. 5th, Meyer said, “We are back from Closed Session with nothing to report out.” Plus, the Closed Session meeting on Oct. 16th does not appear on the City’s agenda page either under regular or special meetings. www.brentwoodca.gov/government/meeting-information Yet, because it was a personnel matter regarding something that had yet to be finalized with the city manager, she could not report out until last Friday at the earliest following the Closed Session meeting that day.

City Manager’s webpage on the Brentwood city website as of 10/20/26. Screenshot source: City of Brentwood

As of Tuesday, Oct. 20th, Duffy’s photo and name were still on the City Manager’s page of the City’s website. See City Manager | Brentwood, CA

Questions for City Staff

In response to who is the current acting city manager, Assistant City Manager Terrance Davis said, “I remain the Acting City Manager until the Council takes further action.”

He and City Attorney Thomas L. Smith were informed about the Oct. 16th meeting agenda not appearing on the City’s webpage and asked the following: “Was there a glitch with the City’s agenda webpage? Was the meeting publicly noticed at least 24 hours before? If so, please provide a copy of the notice. If not, how can the Council hold a Closed Session meeting without first placing it on an agenda and announcing it to the public?”

Finally, they were asked, “Why didn’t Mayor Meyer report out from last Friday’s Closed Session meeting that day instead of waiting until the beginning of yesterday’s special meeting?”

Neither responded prior to publication time. Please check back later for any updates to this report.

 

Pittsburg High students plan walkout, march to protest data center project before Council meeting Monday

By 2 Comments

Source: Stop Pittsburg Data Center Coalition

19 minutes before end of school day

Los estudiantes de Pittsburg High planean una huelga y una marcha para protestar contra el proyecto del centro de datos antes de la reunión del Concejo el lunes

19 minutos antes del fin de la jornada escolar

By Allen D. Payton

According to Marifer Miranda, East County Community Organizer for Concord-based Monument Impact’s Antioch office, the Stop Pittsburg Data Center Coalition, is holding a walkout by Pittsburg High School students Monday afternoon, Oct. 19, 2026, at 3:15 p.m. with a half-mile march to City Hall, before the Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. The walkout is scheduled to begin 19 minutes before school lets out after 6th Period which ends at 3:34 p.m. according to Pittsburg High’s Bell Schedule.

WHAT: Student Walkout, March and Evening City Council Meeting

WHEN: Monday, October 19 Walkout at 3:15 pm and City Council Meeting 7:00 pm

WHERE: Pittsburg High, 1750 Harbor Street, Pittsburg to City Hall, 65 Civic Avenue

The Stop Pittsburg Data Center Coalition is an intergenerational collective of families, educators, students, union members, and well-established residents residing in Pittsburg, that are fighting to stop data center development in our city and county. As of Friday, October 16, 2026, our initial petition has almost reached 30,000 signatures with the majority coming from Contra Costa Residents. We also uplift the voices of our neighbors who are mixed-status, disabled, and low-income workers who are the most vulnerable and deeply impacted by this city project.

The previous time the AVAIO Data Center Project was on the City Council agenda was during an explosive August 3rd meeting where City Council defended their decision to approve the data center project and asked for residents to “trust we [City Council] made the decision with the best interest of residents in mind.”

Rendering of proposed AVAIO Digital data center in Pittsburg. Source: City of Pittsburg

Join us for a day of action sparked by Pittsburg High School students where we will march from the front of Pittsburg High School and finish at Pittsburg City Hall. Later in the evening at 7:00 pm, the City Council meeting will review an update from the Community Advisory Committee and receive a recommendation for next steps. Coalition members will be present to give public comment and ensure our demands are heard and met.

Under Item. 4 on Monday night’s meeting agenda, a presentation will be provided to the Council entitled, “Data Center and the Advisory Committee on Data Center Update – An informational overview regarding the advisory committee’s objectives and process.”

Pittsburg residents reject that statement and demand:

1) Implement a legally binding 90-day Moratorium on ALL Phases of Data Center Projects in the City;

2) Ban on ALL Data Projects in the City; and

3) Increased transparency of City Budget & Public Process

Proposed data center in the Pittsburg Technology Park Specific Plan. Source: City of Pittsburg

How to Provide Public Comment

In-Person – Attend the meeting at the listed location. Complete a speaker card or follow the instructions announced at the meeting. When called, approach the podium and provide your comments.

Remote – Use the Zoom participation link for the meeting or call (669) 900-6833, ID: 898 0554 4017. When the item is open for public comment, use the “Raise Hand” feature. When called, unmute your microphone and provide your comments.

For more information about the Coalition email Pittsburgdatacenter@gmail.com and visit Stop Pittsburg Data Center.

Los jóvenes lideran la lucha local contra el projecto del centro de datos

Huelga estudiantil, protesta en el concejo municipal y seguimiento del Comité Asesor Comunitario

QUÉ: Huelga estudiantil, Marcha y Reunión del Concejo Municipal

CUANDO: Lunes 19 de octubre a las 3:15 (Huelga) y Reunión del Concejo Municipal a las 7PM

DÓNDE: 1750 Harbor St, Pittsburg, CA 94565 (Pittsburg High), 65 Civic Avenue (Concejo Municipal)

QUIÉN: para detener el centro de datos de Pittsburg

La Coalición Stop Pittsburg Data Center es un colectivo intergeneracional de familias, educadores, estudiantes, sindicalistas y residentes consolidados de Pittsburg, California, que luchan para detener la construcción de un centro de datos en nuestra ciudad y condado. Desde el viernes 16 de octubre de 2026, nuestra petición inicial había alcanzado casi 30,000 firmas, la mayoría siendo de residentes del condado de Contra Costa. También alzamos la voz de nuestros vecinos con estatus migratorio mixto, personas con discapacidad y trabajadores de bajos ingresos, quienes son los más vulnerables y se ven profundamente afectados por este proyecto municipal.

La última vez que el proyecto del centro de datos AVAIO estuvo en la agenda del Concejo Municipal fue durante una tensa reunión el 3 de agosto, donde la ciudad defendió su decisión de aprobar el proyecto del centro de datos y pidió a los residentes que “confíen en que [el Concejo Municipal] tomó la decisión pensando en el mejor interés de los residentes”. Los residentes de Pittsburg rechazan esa declaración y exigen:

1) Implementar una moratoria legalmente vinculante de 90 días sobre TODAS las fases de los proyectos de centros de datos en la ciudad;

2) Prohibir TODOS los proyectos de datos en la ciudad; y

3) Aumentar la transparencia del presupuesto municipal y del proceso público.

Únete a nosotros para un día de acción impulsado por Estudiantes de la secundaria de Pittsburg: marcharemos desde la entrada de la escuela hasta las puertas del Concejo Municipal de Pittsburg. Más tarde, a las 7PM, el Concejo Municipal revisará un informe del Comité Asesor Comunitario y recibirá recomendaciones sobre los próximos pasos. Miembros de la coalición estarán presentes para expresar sus inquietudes y asegurar que nuestras demandas sean escuchadas y atendidas.

Más información, aqui: StopPittsburgDataCenter.com y Pittsburgdatacenter@gmail.com.

Garamendi, DeSaulnier react to GAO watchdog report claiming ‘Trump’s EPA broke the law’, demand return of $19 million to North Richmond project

By Leave a Comment

Congressmen Garamendi and DeSaulnier official photos

Funding cancelled because of its “DEl initiatives, ‘environmental justice’ initiatives, and conflict with the Agency’s policy of prioritizing merit, fairness, and excellence” – EPA

Also, later rescinded by Congress in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act

By Cameron Niven, Communications Director, Office of Congressman John Garamendi

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, Representative John Garamendi (D-CA-08) and Representative Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA-10), who each represent portions of Contra Costa County, issued the following statement after the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the government watchdog, published Garamendi’s requested report finding that the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) decision to block a $19 million Community Change Grant to Contra Costa County violated the law.

This news comes more than one year after Reps. Garamendi and DeSaulnier confronted the EPA for violating federal appropriations law and federal court injunctions by canceling a $19.1 million Community Change Grant awarded to Contra Costa County for its North Richmond Community Resilience Initiative.

“The GAO confirmed what we knew all along: President Trump’s EPA broke the law, and now I’m demanding they pay us back,” said Garamendi. “This funding was, and still is, not a suggestion. Congress mandated years ago that these funds be delivered to frontline communities like North Richmond, which, because of President Trump’s blatant abuse of the law, has continued to suffer the health impacts of extreme pollution. Not only has Trump’s EPA acted in ways that break the law, but because of its callousness and disregard for the American people, it is endangering the health and wellbeing of some of our nation’s most vulnerable residents. The people of North Richmond deserve better. Trump took away their money, and now they need to give it back.”

“Over a year ago, I was proud to stand with Congressman Garamendi in calling on the Trump Administration to reverse course as they illegally clawed back over $19 million in federal funding for environmental protection efforts from Contra Costa County,” said DeSaulnier. “Now the GAO, an independent government watchdog agency, has confirmed the Administration violated the law in stealing this money and we demand it be reinstated immediately.”

Background

In spring 2025, the EPA terminated a $19.1 million Community Change Grant awarded to Contra Costa County for its North Richmond Community Resilience Initiative. The initiative is one of 105 applications selected for the Inflation Reduction Act’s Community Change Grants (CCG) Program announced by the Biden Administration in December 2024, just at the end of his term, which was the largest national investment in environmental and climate justice (ECJ).

The $19.1 million in funding was allocated directly to the community for the initiative, which aimed to build a resilience center for emergencies and natural disasters and to plant 65 trees along the Verde Elementary schoolyard to shield students from pollution caused by a new distribution center.

In response to the news of the cancellation, Congressman Garamendi and Congressman DeSaulnier sent a letter to Trump-appointed EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin stating that the agency flagrantly violated the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act without any explanation or due process.

In response to Garamendi and DeSaulnier’s letter, the EPA provided little to no justification for the cancellation, saying only that the agency does not support programs or organizations that promote or take part in DEI or “environmental justice” initiatives.

Congressman Garamendi then requested a report on the Trump Administration’s actions from the GAO, which published its decision on the termination of the Community Change Grants on October 7. The GAO found that the EPA violated the law and noted that Garamendi and DeSaulnier’s letter to the EPA and the agency’s response also helped inform its determination.

GAO Claims EPA Broke the Law, Congress Later Rescinded Funding

According to the GAO’s report, “In early 2025, EPA decided to terminate the ECJ subprograms, including the CCG Program, paused payments to grantees, and later terminated the CCGs. Congress subsequently rescinded the unobligated balances of amounts made available to the ECJ Program as part of Public Law 119-21 – commonly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA).

“Unless Congress has enacted a law providing otherwise, executive branch officials must take care to ensure that they prudently obligate appropriations during their period of availability. The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA) allows the President to withhold funds from obligation or expenditure, but only under strictly limited circumstances and only in a manner consistent with that Act.

“We find that EPA violated the ICA when the agency, without submitting a special message to Congress: (1) withheld funds from expenditure for the CCG Program after deciding to terminate the program; and (2) withheld funds from obligation by terminating the CCGs. These withholdings were impoundments subject to the ICA and not programmatic delays.

“GAO is aware of ongoing litigation involving the termination of ECJ Program grants, including CCGs. We have included the most up-to-date information related to the litigation in this decision.”

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Want to serve on the Contra Costa County Mosquito & Vector Control District Board of Trustees?

By Leave a Comment

Application deadline: Nov. 23

By Diana Oyler, Sr. Deputy, Contra Costa County Administrator’s Office & Office of Communications & Media

(Martinez, CA) – Contra Costa County is seeking applicants to fill one vacancy on the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District Board of Trustees. County residents age 18 and older are encouraged to apply. The appointment, made by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, will be for a two or four-year term beginning January 7, 2027.

Established in 1927, the District provides public health services throughout Contra Costa County by controlling mosquitoes, rats, skunks, yellowjackets and other vectors that can transmit disease. These efforts help protect public health and prevent outbreaks that could disrupt recreational, residential, agricultural and industrial activities.

The District Board of Trustees meets at 7 p.m. on the second Monday of every other month in Concord. Trustees receive a $100 monthly expense stipend, contingent on meeting attendance.

Applications are available by calling the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at (925) 655-2000 or by visiting https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/3418. Completed applications must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar St., Martinez, CA 94553, by 5 p.m. Monday, November 9, 2026.

Applicants should be available to participate in public interviews conducted virtually via Zoom on Monday, November 23, 2026.

For more information about the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District, visit http://www.contracostamosquito.gov.

Recent report finds public money subsidizing concert business including at Concord’s Toyota Pavilion, Shoreline Amphitheatre

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator for Political Economy and Regulation

“Sold Out: How state and local governments pay for Live Nation’s monopoly”

“A federal jury found that Live Nation monopolized the amphitheater market, which has led to higher prices and fewer choices for music fans across the country.” – Report Co-Author Brian Shearer

 “This is not a credible report. State and local governments invest in live entertainment because venues are economic engines…” – Live Nation spokesperson. Shares statements on jury verdict and DOJ settlement

By Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator, Vanderbilt University

Concord, CA–A recent analysis published by the Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator for Political Economy and Regulation (VPA) reveals that state and local governments own nearly half of Live Nation’s large outdoor amphitheaters and stadiums and have been subsidizing the company’s live events business to the tune of more than $420 million. The report raises questions about the propriety of local governments devoting significant public resources to a company as large and as powerful as Live Nation, particularly as nearly two-thirds of independent music venues struggle to turn a profit.

The report examines 64 large outdoor amphitheaters and stadiums operated by Live Nation across the country, including Toyota Pavilion at Concord in Concord, CA and Shoreline Amphitheatre in Mountain View, CA. VPA’s researchers found that in 30 of 64 instances, these venues are not owned by Live Nation or another private actor. Instead, Live Nation operates buildings owned by state or local governments.

The City of Concord owns the Pavilion, and the City of Mountain View owns Shoreline.

Sections of Live Nation’s venue chart. Source: VPA

These contracts are often never subject to competitive bidding, resulting in highly favorable terms for Live Nation, including cheap rent, the ability to generate revenue by selling naming rights to a government building, and even taxpayer support to build and maintain the properties from which Live Nation profits. Rarely, if ever, do these contracts insist on terms to advance the public interest, such as requirements to operate the venue as an “open room” for artists not promoted by Live Nation, limits on excessive fees, or street pricing for concessions.

In addition, Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator found that at least $420 million in taxpayer money went toward benefiting Live Nation, not including the value of below-market rent or profits from selling naming rights on government buildings.

“A federal jury found that Live Nation monopolized the amphitheater market, which has led to higher prices and fewer choices for music fans across the country,” said Brian Shearer, director of competition and regulatory policy at Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator and a co-author of the report. “But cities and states don’t need to wait for a court order to begin rectifying this problem. They can simply stop financing Live Nation’s venues and evict them from public-owned venues.”

The findings also highlight that government contracting could be a powerful lever for addressing Live Nation’s monopoly. To help local governments build a live music ecosystem that reinvests in local communities rather than enriching a powerful monopoly, the report proposes two potential solutions.

The first, an “outsourcing with conditions” model, would open venue operating contracts to competitive bidding with strict conditions to advance the public interest and a preference for independent venue operators familiar with the unique needs of local communities. The second, a “public D.I.Y.” model, proposes that cities operate their properties through a specially chartered public nonprofit corporation. Both approaches would enable local governments to operate their large venues and advance important public-interest goals while avoiding siphoning taxpayer funds onto the balance sheets of an extractive monopoly.

Read about the report in VPA’s Substack and watch the YouTube video.

Live Nation Responds

In response to the report, a spokesperson for Live Nation wrote, “This is not a credible report. It is a poorly researched and one-sided advocacy piece backed by independent venues who don’t want to compete against new and renovated venues regardless of the benefits to fans and communities. State and local governments invest in live entertainment because venues are economic engines that bring artists, fans, jobs and spending to their communities. Our amphitheaters generate an estimated $5.8 billion in local economic activity and $800 million in municipal taxes each year, while supporting nearly 48,000 jobs. And over the last decade, we’ve invested more than $825 million of our own funds improving these venues.”

In addition, they provided the following facts:

  • $5.8B in estimated annual local economic activity generated outside our amphitheaters by concerts and fans
  • ~$800M annually in municipal taxes from taxable amphitheater revenue streams, including tickets, food & beverage and merchandise
  • 47,609 full- and part-time employees, representing approximately $225M in annual wages
  • $825M+ invested in renovations and improvements across the amphitheater portfolio over the last 10 years
  • ~$450M in rent paid to government landlords across 30 amphitheaters over the last 10 years
  • Public investment in major sports and entertainment venues is commonplace. Recent examples include:
    • Kansas City Chiefs — $1.8B new stadium
    • Tennessee Titans — $1.26B new stadium
    • Washington Commanders — $1.0B new stadium
    • Buffalo Bills — $850M new stadium
    • San Antonio Spurs — $800M new arena
    • Jacksonville Jaguars — $775M stadium renovation

When pressed further and asked about the federal jury findings, Live Nation shared the following statements on the settlement issued on March 9, 2026 and the jury verdict issued on April 15, 2026:

Live Nation Entertainment Reaches Settlement With U.S. Department of Justice

Live Nation Entertainment, Inc., the world’s leading live entertainment company, announced today (March 9, 2026) that the company has reached a settlement with the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) in the antitrust lawsuit brought by the DOJ. The company has consistently maintained that the DOJ’s allegations were without merit, and a portion of the original claims were dismissed by the court before trial began. This settlement will resolve all remaining matters with the DOJ, without any admission of wrongdoing, and the settlement will be reflected in a final proposed judgement that will be submitted to the court for approval.

-Live Nation Entertainment issued the following statement: 

We are pleased to have settled our lawsuit with the United States Department of Justice.

“Today marks a major step in improving the concert experience for artists and fans throughout the United States. Live Nation is proud to lead the way enhancing this experience with our amphitheaters, which will be open to all promoters, allowing these promoters to decide how best to distribute up to 50% of the tickets, and capping ticketing service fees at 15%. By giving artists greater flexibility in choosing their promotional partners and ticketing strategy while also keeping the cost of a concert more affordable for fans, we are putting more power where it should be – with artists and fans,” said Michael Rapino, President and CEO of Live Nation Entertainment.

In addition, Live Nation will be divesting its 13 exclusive booking agreements with amphitheaters nationwide. All owned and operated amphitheaters will continue to be operated by Live Nation as open venues, promoting competition and maximizing show volume.

In ticketing, Ticketmaster will be providing both exclusive and non-exclusive ticketing proposals to all major concert venues, which preserves the rights of venues to seek the type of contracts they preferred over the years while providing the government with restrictions to mitigate their concerns. At the same time, for venues that choose to do so, they may distribute some portion of their tickets through other primary ticketing marketplaces.

“We have never relied on exclusivity to drive our ticketing business, it has simply been the result of having the best products, services and people in the industry. We are happy to take greater steps to empower artists and venues in their ticketing decisions, and are confident we will continue to succeed on the quality of what we deliver,” continued Rapino.

This settlement will also include an eight-year extension of the company’s consent decree with the DOJ, including retaliation and conditioning terms, providing venues ongoing comfort the company does not condone such behavior.

There is no financial component to the settlement with the DOJ. This does not settle the claims of all plaintiffs in the lawsuit, and the company has created a $280 million settlement fund to address the states’ damages claims.

Statement on Jury Verdict

The jury’s verdict is not the last word on this matter. Pending motions will determine whether the liability and damages rulings stand.

Live Nation will soon renew its motion for judgment as a matter of law, which the Court deferred until after the jury returned its verdict. That motion addresses all liability theories. The Court previously noted that Live Nation’s motion raises serious issues.

There is also a pending motion to strike the damages testimony on which the jury’s award was based. The Court deferred ruling on that motion as well, while noting significant concerns with the damages expert’s analysis.

Of course, Live Nation can and will appeal any unfavorable rulings on these motions.

The jury’s award of $1.72 per ticket applies to a limited number of tickets—those sold at 257 venues, which represent about 20% of total tickets—and only to purchases by fans (excluding brokers) in certain states over the past five years. Based on that scope, we believe the aggregate single damages figure would be below $150 million, which would be trebled.  In connection with the DOJ settlement, Live Nation has already accrued $280 million toward state damages and civil penalty claims.

Injunctive relief will be determined by the Court after the states make a remedy proposal, which we expect in the coming weeks. In the meantime, the Tunney Act proceedings regarding the DOJ settlement will continue. We remain confident that the ultimate outcome of the States’ case will not be materially different than what is envisioned by the DOJ settlement.

No Outside Funding for VPA Research, Report

VPA was asked who funded or helped develop their research and how much was contributed financially to the effort.

They responded, “VPA is an independent academic center at Vanderbilt University. There was no outside sponsor for this research, and VPA did not receive any external funding to compile this report.”

City of Concord Studying Report

In response to the report, Colleen Awad, City of Concord Community Relations Manager wrote, “We are now reviewing it, as it was just released, and do not have a comment at this time.”

City of Mountain View Responds

Also in response, Lenka Wright, the City of Mountain View’s Chief Communications Officer in the Communications and Outreach Division of the City Manager’s Office wrote, “Mountain View’s Shoreline Amphitheatre is a premier outdoor concert venue that is operated by Live Nation. Upon entering the initial lease with Live Nation, the City has not paid for any facility upgrades or expansions. Per the lease, these are Live Nation’s expenses and the City Council must approve any recommended facility improvements. The rent that Live Nation pays to the City for Shoreline Amphitheatre operations is also competitive. In addition, the City has retained the naming rights to the venue, unlike some other California jurisdictions named in the report.”

About Live Nation Entertainment

Live Nation Entertainment (NYSE: LYV) is the world’s leading live entertainment company comprised of global market leaders: Ticketmaster, Live Nation Concerts and Live Nation Media & Sponsorship. For additional information, visit www.livenationentertainment.com.

About VPA

The Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator for Political Economy and Regulation (VPA) focuses on cutting-edge topics in political economy and regulation to swiftly bring research, education, and policy proposals from infancy to maturity. To learn more about our work, visit vu.edu/vpa.

Please check back later for any updates.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Want to serve on the Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee?

By Leave a Comment

Representing Contra Costa County

Application deadline: Nov. 9

By Diana Oyler, Sr. Deputy, Contra Costa County Administrator’s Office & Office of Communications & Media

(Martinez, CA) – The Board of Supervisors established the Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee (LMHAC) in July 2018 as part of the dissolution of the Los Medanos Health District. LMHAC plays a critical role in guiding and supporting community-based healthcare services to its residents through sponsoring and funding programs and activities related to health, wellness, and prevention that serve approximately 97,000 people, encompassing the Los Medanos Health Area boundaries, which are made up of communities within the City of Pittsburg, small portions of the cities of Antioch, Clayton, Concord, and the unincorporated community of Bay Point. The LMHAC is responsible for developing an area health plan to determine the community’s specific health needs, identify priorities to address those needs, and facilitate a request-for-proposals process to make funding recommendations for health programs in the community to the Board of Supervisors.

The County is recruiting volunteers to fill one vacancy in the “At Large” seat for the three-year term of January 1, 2027 through December 31, 2029.  The County Board of Supervisors will make the appointment following a screening process conducted by the Board’s Internal Operations Committee. Residents and those who work in the territory of the District, which is primarily the Pittsburg/Bay Point area, are welcome to apply.  This is a volunteer appointment – no stipends or reimbursements are authorized for this Committee.

Application forms can be obtained from the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors by calling (925) 655-2000 or the application can be completed online by visiting the County website at  https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/3418.

Applications should be returned to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar St., Martinez, CA  94553 no later than by 5 p.m. on Monday, November 9, 2026.

Applicants should plan to be available for public interviews to be conducted virtually via Zoom on Monday, November 23, 2026.

More information about the Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee can be found at their website at: https://www.cchealth.org/about-contra-costa-health/leadership/commissions-advisory-groups/los-medanos-health-advisory-committee or by contacting committee staff, Denise Milosevich, at Denise.Milosevich@cchealth.org

Want to serve on the Contra Costa County Public Law Library Board of Trustees?

By Leave a Comment

Photo: CCC Public Law Library

Application deadline: Nov. 6

By Diana Oyler, Sr. Deputy, Contra Costa County Administrator’s Office & Office of Communications & Media

(Martinez, CA) – The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors is seeking applicants for the Public Law Library Board of Trustees. The Board of Trustees was established pursuant to State law and County Ordinance to maintain a law library in Martinez.

The Board of Trustees is the governing body for the Law Library with the authority to determine personnel, fiscal, and administrative policies to fulfill the legal information needs of the community. County residents who are members of the State Bar and have an interest in public policy and library administration are encouraged to apply for this non-paid volunteer opportunity. The County Board of Supervisors will appoint to fill one vacancy for a one-year term beginning Jan. 1, 2027 and ending on Dec. 31, 2027. The Board of Trustees hold monthly in-person meetings in Martinez.

Application forms can be obtained from the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors by calling (925) 655-2000 or the application can be completed online by visiting the County website at  https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/3418.

Applications should be returned to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar St., Martinez, CA  94553 no later than by 5 p.m. on Friday, Nov. 6, 2026.

Applicants should plan to be available for public interviews to be conducted virtually via Zoom on Monday, November 23, 2026.

More information about the Contra Costa Public Law Library can be obtained by calling Director Amreet Sandhu at (925) 646-2783 or director@ll.cccounty.us, or visiting the Law Library website at http://www.cccpllib.org.

Want to serve on the East Bay Regional Parks District’s Park Advisory Committee?

By Leave a Comment

Representing Contra Costa County; Application deadline: Nov. 9

By Diana Oyler, Sr. Deputy, Contra Costa County Administrator’s Office & Office of Communications & Media

(Martinez, CA) – The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors is seeking an individual who is interested in park land use to represent the County on the East Bay Regional Parks District Park Advisory Committee (PAC).  The PAC is a 21-member citizens’ advisory group that studies issues and makes recommendations and comments on myriad policy issues, such as grazing, dogs, horses and bikes in parks, the Park District budget, naming of park facilities, park land use plans, new concessions, and more.

Members are appointed for two-year terms and may serve a total of four consecutive terms, or eight years. The term of office for this appointment will be January 1, 2027 through December 31, 2028. Service is voluntary and members receive no compensation. Meetings are held on the fourth Monday of each month at 4 p.m.

Application forms for the Contra Costa County seat can be obtained from the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors by calling (925) 655-2000, or the application can be completed online by visiting the County website at  https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/3418.  Applications should be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar St., Martinez, CA  94553, no later than 5:00 p.m. on Monday, November 9, 2026.

Applicants should plan to be available for public interviews to be held virtually via Zoom on Monday, November 23, 2026.

More information about the Park Advisory Committee can be obtained on their website at: https://www.ebparks.org/public-meetings/park-advisory or by calling Erich Pfuehler at the East Bay Regional Parks District at (510) 544-2006.

AC Transit, AFSCME Local 3916 reach new deal for 300+ employees

By Leave a Comment

Photo: AC Transit

District says agreement strengthens workforce stability, helping protect service for riders

Requires AC Transit Board approval

By Robert Lyles, Media Affairs & Strategic Initiatives Manager, Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District 

OAKLAND, Calif. – The Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) has reached a ratified agreement with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 3916, marking an important advancement during a pivotal year for the Transit District and its workforce of more than 2,200 employees.

The ratified collective bargaining agreement offers greater stability and certainty for the more than 300 Local 3916 members, while reinforcing the workforce stability needed to deliver reliable service to more than 3 million riders each month.

“I want to thank everyone on both sides of the negotiating table for the professionalism and persistence that brought us to this milestone. The negotiations were challenging but never became an ‘us versus them.’ We remained focused on supporting the administrative employees, supervisors, and managers who work to keep AC Transit moving every day. This agreement demonstrates what ‘One East Bay. One AC Transit’ looks like in action,” says General Manager Sal Llamas.

Among the 2.5-year agreement’s key provisions are wage increases designed to help employees keep pace with inflation, with 3 percent increases in the current fiscal year, FY 2027–28, and FY 2028–29. The agreement also includes an on-call pay adjustment that helps ensure qualified employees are ready to respond when the unexpected happens.

The newly ratified CBA helps AC Transit retain the skilled employees who keep our service moving safely and reliably. That workforce stability is particularly important as the Transit District manages an estimated $200 million in projected deficits over the next four years. By helping reduce turnover and providing greater certainty around labor costs, the CBA gives AC Transit a more predictable foundation for planning as it works toward long-term financial sustainability.

“Our members help power innovative trip-planning tools, coordinate bus assignments and running times, monitor service disruptions and emergencies on the road, and perform countless other essential functions that our riders may never see. Reaching this contract agreement and the vote shows the Transit District recognizes the value we bring to work every day,” said Gideon Murey, AFSCME Local 3916 President.

Beyond compensation, the agreement strengthens employees’ voice in the workplace. It expands the Labor Management Committee (LMC), giving Local 3916 a greater role in providing recommendations on the Transit District’s use of contract workers. In addition, the agreement introduces new illuminated safety equipment, providing greater visibility and protection for employees working around moving buses, traffic, maintenance equipment, and in low-light conditions.

Now that AFSCME Local 3916 members have ratified the agreement, it advances to the AC Transit Board of Directors for consideration and final approval.

Source: AFSCME Council 57 Local 3916

About AC Transit

The Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, known as AC Transit, has been in operation since 1960 and is the largest public bus-only system in California, and the 3rd largest bus-only transit agency in the United States. Based out of Oakland, California and multiple facilities throughout Alameda and Contra-Costa counties, AC Transit makes bus service available to 1.5 million East Bay residents that populate our 364 square mile service area. AC Transit operates a fleet of 626 buses and 6 facilities and is moving forward its zero-emission program as funding becomes available. Currently, AC Transit connects to 14 transit agencies, 27 BART stations, seven Amtrak stations, and five ferry terminals.

It provides an average of nearly 135,000 daily passenger trips with 133 bus lines throughout the 364-square-mile service area. AC Transit provides safe, convenient, courteous, and reliable service in 13 cities and adjacent unincorporated areas as well as carrying almost 7,000 daily riders across the bay to San Francisco.

In 2023, the District was honored as the Outstanding Public Transportation System of the Year by the American Public Transportation Association. AC Transit’s mission is to deliver safe, reliable, sustainable transit service that responds to the needs of our customers and community.

About AFSCME Council 57

AFSCME fights to promote freedom and opportunity for all working people wherever, and whoever, they are. For public service workers, we negotiate better pay and benefits because fighting for every member’s future is a form of respect. We inform people about the issues that keep all working families up at night because informed advocates command respect. That’s how we win better lives for ourselves, our families, our communities and our country. These are the things we will never quit fighting for.

AFSCME Council 57 is comprised of 26 local unions representing 35,000 members throughout Northern California and the Central Valley including Local 3916. Established in 1963, the Council was formed as a progressive, member-driven labor organization dedicated to empowering and securing dignity and respect for all workers. We work together to improve wages, benefits and working conditions through organizing, collective bargaining and political action. We represent workers in schools and community colleges, transit agencies, public works and services, clinics and hospitals, and water and wastewater facilities. Our members are also the health and social service professionals in corrections facilities across California.

We support our local unions by:

  • Providing resources, training and professional services
  • Fighting for economic and social justice
  • Raising awareness on issues that affect working families
  • Empowering members in representation and bargaining
  • Mobilizing workers to participate in the political process
  • Sharing effective communication and resources
  • Organizing unorganized workers

We also partner with other labor organizations, service providers, consumers, the faith community and community-based organizations to:

  • ensure the health and vitality of working families and their communities
  • seek solutions to critical issues like the healthcare and mental health crisis as well as climate change
  • raise awareness of wasteful contracting out of public services
  • stop attacks on public sector workers
  • fix California’s inequitable tax policies

Council 57 is affiliated with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, a democratic union with 1.4 million members who share a common commitment to public service in our communities. We also encourage our locals to affiliate with their local arm of the AFL-CIO, the Central Labor Council.

For more information visit https://afscme57.org/locals/afscme-local-3916.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.