Contra Costa Herald

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

Contra Costa Assessor Kramer won’t seek re-election to 9th term

By Leave a Comment

Contra Costa County Assessor Gus Kramer in 2022. Source: Contra Costa County

Announces retirement after 40 years in public office effective Dec. 2026 at end of current term

Supports Assistant County Assessor Vince Robb as his replacement

By Robin Cantu, Assessor’s Customer Services Coordinator, Contra Costa County Assessor’s Office

On Friday, March 6, 2026, Contra Costa County Assessor Gus Kramer announced he would not run for re-election to a ninth term. He first served in public office as the Martinez City Clerk when he was elected in 1986.

The announcement reads, he “will retire from his position as County Assessor in December 2026, concluding more than three decades of dedicated public service to the residents of Contra Costa County

“First elected in 1994, Kramer has been entrusted by the voters of Contra Costa County for eight consecutive terms over the past 32 years. During that time, he has overseen significant modernization and improvements within the Assessor’s Office, working to ensure that property assessments are conducted with fairness, transparency, and efficiency.

“It has been the honor of a lifetime to serve the people of Contra Costa County,” said Kramer. “I am deeply grateful to the voters who placed their trust in me eight times over the past three decades. Their confidence and support have meant a great deal to me throughout my career.”

Kramer also emphasized the contributions of several key members of his leadership team who have played an essential role in strengthening the office’s service to the public. He expressed special appreciation to Vince Robb, Assistant County Assessor; Peter Yu, Assistant County Assessor; and Robin Cantu, Assessor’s Customer Services Coordinator, for their outstanding dedication and leadership.

“Vince Robb and Peter Yu have been exceptional partners in managing the complex responsibilities of the Assessor’s Office, bringing professionalism, expertise, and a strong commitment to public service every day,” Kramer said. “Robin Cantu has also been instrumental in ensuring that our office maintains a high level of responsiveness and service for the public.”

Kramer noted that their leadership—along with the dedication of the entire Assessor’s Office staff—has helped bring the efficiency, professionalism, and public service of the office to an all-time high level.

“I want to thank every member of the Assessor’s Office, past and present, who has worked so hard to serve the residents of Contra Costa County,” Kramer added. “Together we have worked to make the business of property value assessment as simple, transparent, and accessible as possible for the public.”

As he prepares for retirement, Kramer said he is proud of what the office has accomplished and grateful for the opportunity to serve the community.

“Public service has been a privilege, and I will always be thankful for the trust placed in me by the people of Contra Costa County,” Kramer said.

Supports Assistant County Assessor Vince Robb

Asked on Friday if he had groomed someone to take his place, Kramer said, “The Assistant County Assessor, Vince Robb, in my office is a good choice. Nobody has experience or credentials like Vince. He has 20 years’ experience in the Assessor’s Office.  The other two have never appraised a single property.”

He was referring to Nick Spinner, whose ballot designation is Senior Systems Engineer in the Contra Costa Elections Division list of candidates for the June 2nd primary election, and Kismat Kathrani, whose designation is Software Technology Entrepreneur.

About Kramer

In the bio on his campaign website which is still up as of Saturday, March 7th, Kramer wrote, “I was born in Contra Costa and raised in East County. My high school was Pacifica High in West Pittsburg (Go Spartans!) and I graduated in 1968.  Back then the area was called West Pittsburg, but now it is called Bay Point. It was a small high school but we played hard in local sports and competed well against larger central county schools.  It closed in 1976 and is now Riverview Middle School on Pacifica Ave. Having a high school of our own, rather than sending kids to Concord or Pittsburg, was a real anchor for the community.

“After high school I attended DVC for a year, then went to mortuary school in San Francisco. Working in mortuary and funeral services is a very specific calling. It is not for everyone, but for those that answer the call it can be fulfilling. It taught me a deep respect for life, caring for the living, and humbleness in the face of the awesome hereafter. Working as an embalmer introduced me to the CC Coroner’s office, and I worked there for several years.  It might be how I keep my sense of humor when things are gloomy.  I continued my education at USF studying public administration at night, while I worked for the county. This began my career in public service.

“I settled and raised my family in Martinez, the County Seat of Contra Costa.  the adopted home town of environmentalist John Muir and the birthplace of baseball hero Joe DiMaggio.  I still live there today.

“Bitten is a strong word for it, so maybe I was nipped by the political bug in the mid-80s in Martinez.  I wanted to be involved in my community, give back, and continue to serve.  I ran for City Clerk and won. As clerk I was not voting on issues like the city council, but I was part of the process and aware of the machinations of local government.  As city clerk I donated my monthly salary to provide scholarships to local students. Education helped my rise up and build a foundation, and I wanted to give back to the community rather than take from it.”

Official County Bio

According to his official 2022 bio on the Contra Costa County website, “Gus grew up in Bay Point, California, and is a graduate of the San Francisco College of Mortuary Science and the University of San Francisco.

His public career in Contra Costa County began in 1974. Kramer embarked on his tenure with the County at the Contra Costa County Sheriff Coroner’s Office, later moving to the Contra Costa County Probation Department, and finally to the Contra Costa County Public Works Department until 1994 when he was elected to the position of County Assessor. In addition to his service to Contra Costa County and its residents, Kramer was also elected to the position of Martinez City Clerk in 1986.

“As County Assessor, Kramer has overseen remarkable improvements to streamline the operations of his office, eliminate backlogs, and achieve higher levels of public service, all while operating substantially under budget.

“The State Board of Equalization acknowledged his office as one of the best managed assessor’s operations in California. Gus Kramer is a member of the California Assessors’ Association and the International Right of Way Association and has more than 43 years as a licensed real estate salesperson.”

He now has been a licensed real estate agent for 47 years, since 1979, Kramer said.

During his work for the County Public Works Department real estate division he shared, “I valued commercial and residential real estate to be purchased for public works projects.”

Future Plans

Asked what his plans are for the future, Kramer exclaimed with a laugh, “I gotta find something to do!”

Seriously, he said he will find something where he can apply his skills, knowledge and experience, probably in real estate.

BART Board votes 8-1 to close up to 15 stations if proposed tax measure fails

By 4 Comments

The BART Board voted to close four stations in Contra Costa County if the proposed Nov. sales tax measure fails. Source: BART

Contra Costa’s 4 representatives vote to adopt Alternative Service Plan to balance budget including 1,170 employee layoffs

Ridership still down 50% post-COVID

By Allen D. Payton

On Thursday, Feb. 26, 2026, the BART Board of Directors, on vote of 8-1, adopted an Alternative Service Plan outlining specific budget balancing details to solve a $376M deficit for the next fiscal year if no new funds become available to BART. According to a District press release, BART is facing a structural deficit of $350M to $400M because ridership is still down 50% compared to pre-pandemic levels and BART’s current funding model relies heavily on passenger fares.

As previously reported by the Herald, 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.

Phase 2 Closures Include Pittsburg/Bay Point and Antioch Stations

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.

Based on Proposed Transit Tax Measure Failing

The plan is based on the assumption a sales tax increase measure proposed for the November ballot in five Bay Area counties fails. As previously reported, voters would be asked to consider a one-half sales tax increase in Contra Costa, Alameda, San Mateo and Santa Clara counties and a one-cent sales tax increase in San Francisco County. The 14-year regional transportation sales tax would generate approximately $980 million annually with 60 percent dedicated to preserving service on BART, Muni, Caltrain and AC Transit, as well as San Francisco Bay Ferry and smaller transit agencies providing service in the five counties to keep buses, trains and ferries moving, including WestCat, County Connection and Tri Delta Transit. About one-third of the revenue would go to Contra Costa Transportation Authority, Santa Clara VTA, SamTrans and the Alameda County Transportation Commission, with flexibility to use funds for transit capital, operations, or road paving projects on roads with regular bus service.

Also, as previously reported, an effort is underway to gather signatures to place the measure on the ballot. The sales tax increase would be in addition to the half-cent sales tax for BART operations in Contra Costa, Alameda and San Francisco counties in place since the 1960’s.

Motion and Vote Details

Following public comments and discussion among the Board members a vote was taken on the following motion: The Board adopts the attached Resolution “In the Matter of Initially Approving an Alternative Service Plan to Take Effect January 2027 in the Event the Connect Bay Area Measure Fails to Receive Voter Approval at the Statewide General Election on November 3, 2026 and BART is Unable to Secure Other Revenue Sources.”

The motion was made by District 4 Director Robert Raburn, seconded by District 1 Director Matt Rinn, and passed on a vote of 8-1 with the additional support of District 7 Director Victor Flores, District 2 Director Mark Foley, District 3 Director Barnali Gosh, District 8 Director Janice Li, Board Vice President and District 9 Director Edward Wright and Board President and District 5 Director Melissa Hernandez.

District 6 Director Liz Ames was the only member of the Board of Directors to vote “No”.

Rinn represents portions of Central Contra Costa County, all of Lamorinda and most of the San Ramon Valley, Foley represents portions of Central County and all of East County, Gosh represents all of West County and Hernandez represents portions of San Ramon.

Approved Plan Details

The plan includes specific cuts and financial strategies needed to balance both the FY27 (July 1, 2026-June 30, 2027) and FY28 (July 1, 2027-June 30, 2028) budgets. The plan includes service cuts, station closures, fare increases, a 40% reduction in system support services, laying off 1,170 employees and a series of deferrals and one-time resources. The plan does not name specific stations to be closed and makes clear the BART Board will be responsible for all decisions on station closures. You can read the Alternative Service Plan resolution, resolution attachment and presentation to the BART Board.

BART has already made budget cuts across all departments and instituted a series of cost controls, including rightsizing service, labor savings, operational efficiencies, and reducing BART’s office space footprint. At the same time, BART has also worked to increase revenue by installing new fare gates, leasing out BART parking lots, and offering new fare products such as Clipper BayPass. View a detailed list of cost savings implement by BART at bart.gov/fiscalcliff.

Alternative Service Plan Details

To take place in January 2027:

  • 3-line service (Yellow, Blue, and Orange line service only, with limited peak service in only the peak commute direction on the Red and Green lines).
  • 30-minute frequencies on every line.
  • Closing at 9 pm seven days a week.
  • This service plan represents a 63% reduction in train hours.
  • 30% fare and parking fee increases (the estimated average fare would increase from $4.98 to $6.38).
  • Target approximately $30M in savings over 6 months from non-service budget reductions to fleet and non-fleet maintenance, police, cleaning, and administrative support functions.
  • Continue deferrals of priority capital allocations and retiree medical contributions.
  • Balance remainder of FY27 with one-time resources and financial deferrals.

Following the January 2027 cuts, staff will continuously assess ridership and revenue impacts and the performance of all District functions to determine if further reductions can be safely and legally implemented.

To take place in July 2027 if feasibly safe:

  • Target over $175M in annual cost reductions through a cumulative 70% reduction in service hours:
  • Maintain 3-line service, 30-minute frequencies on each line, closing at 9pm.
  • Close up to 15 stations and/or up to 25% of system track miles.
  • The BART Board will be responsible for all decisions on station or line segment closures.
  • Increase fares and parking fees up to a cumulative 50%. The estimated average fare would increase to $7.26.
  • Target annual operating expense savings of more than a cumulative $130M from non-service budget reductions to fleet and non-fleet maintenance, police, cleaning, and administrative support functions.
  • Continue to defer retiree health contributions; defer most remaining capital allocations.

Contingency:

  • If at any point it is determined BART can’t safely or legally operate with available resources, stop passenger service.
  • Use existing District tax revenues to secure system assets.
  • Work to determine system’s future.

Use of the State Loan  

BART can’t use state loan money to avoid station closures and service cuts if no new revenue becomes available because without new revenue, there is no way to pay the loan back. The state loan primarily helps with cash flow if a November 2026 transit funding measure is successful. It is a bridge loan that gives BART reassurances money will be available to continue to deliver the best service possible until the sales tax dollars from the successful ballot measure become available for BART’s use. This is projected to happen in July 2027 but could take longer. If a funding measure succeeds, BART will use $97M in loan funds to help balance the FY27 budget.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

 

Oakley woman announces third run for Congress in District 10

By Leave a Comment

Katherine Piccinini will again take on incumbent Mark DeSaulnier with campaign theme, “Putting the People First”

Longtime Oakley resident Katherine Piccinini announced she has officially filed to run for Congress in District 10 — “bringing a proven record of community leadership, public service and results.” Although Piccinini lives in the portion of Oakley now in the new District 9 following the passage of Prop. 50 last November, just outside of District 10, when asked about her decision to run in the neighboring congressional district Piccinini said, “I am running in Congressional District 10 as I did in 2024. District 10 is my base and my donors are there. So are my friends and family. District 10 it is!!”

However, candidates for and Members of Congress aren’t required to live in the district they represent, just the same state, as Congressman John Garamendi lived just outside the district he represented for several years.

Her campaign announcement continues, “Coming from a law enforcement family, Katherine believes in honoring those who serve — police, firefighters, military, veterans and first responders — while keeping communities safe and accountable. Her priorities include protecting children, supporting parents, honoring farmers, securing borders and ensuring opportunity for every hardworking American.

“She believes government must work for people — not special interests — and that transparency, accountability, and common sense must replace division and dysfunction. Her campaign is rooted in the belief that Americans deserve clean air, safe food, pure water, safe communities, affordable living, fiscal responsibility, free speech, and a government that listens.  Putting the People First has been her heart since 2022.

“A mother of four and grandmother of five, Piccinini knows firsthand the challenges families face. In 2022, she launched a grassroots write-in campaign that earned over 1,600 votes in just 20 days — the strongest Congressional write-in performance in Northern California in over a decade. In 2024, running on the ballot, she received more than 122,000 votes, the highest total for any non-incumbent congressional candidate in the region.

“Piccinini has served as President of East Contra Costa Republican Women, helped found the Eastern Contra Costa Republican Assembly, and served on multiple county and state party leadership boards. More importantly, she has spent years listening to constituents, supporting community organizations, and standing up for working families.

“Piccinini is running to restore trust in leadership, protect freedoms, and ensure future generations inherit a nation of opportunity, security, and hope for the American Dream once more.

“She pledges to be your voice in Washington — and she wants to hear from you. Together, we can stand as neighbors, not partisans, united in one mission: Putting the People First.

“Contact Katherine Piccinini to share your priorities or support her campaign at piccinini4congress@gmail.com.”

New CD10 Map. Source: Wikipedia

The new District 10 includes most of Contra Costa County, except for Pittsburg, Antioch, Bethel Island, most of West County and portions of Oakley. (See District Map here, here or here) According to Wikipedia, the ethnicity is 47.7% White, 22.2% Asian ,18.3% Hispanic, 6.1% Two or more races, 4.6% Black and 1.2% other and Median household annual income is $151,546.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

CCWD Division 2 Director Burgh to step down March 31st

By Leave a Comment

CCWD Division 2 Director John Burgh will step down after 22 years on March 31, 2026. Photo: CCWD

After representing Central County communities for 22 years on Board

“CCWD is on a solid path investing in the next generation of water service with a collaborative Board and innovative staff.” – Director Burgh

By Nicola McCluney, Management Assistant, Public Affairs, Contra Costa Water District

Concord – During the Board meeting on February 18, Contra Costa Water District’s Board Director, John A. Burgh, announced that after 22 years representing the community on water issues, he will step down from the Board effective March 31, 2026.

Director Burgh was appointed to the Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) Board of Directors in 2004. He represents Division 2, which includes Pleasant Hill, Martinez, Port Costa and a portion of Concord. During his 22-year tenure, he served on the Public Information & Conservation, Operations & Engineering, Finance and Retirement & OPEB Joint Advisory Committees.

Director Burgh’s 42-year professional career, working as an engineer on water and wastewater projects throughout the world, gave him a unique perspective joining the CCWD Board.  His technical expertise translated to thoughtful policy decisions ensuring CCWD makes sound investments in critical infrastructure to the benefit of all customers, including future generations. While serving on the CCWD Board, his highest priorities have been transparency in spending public dollars, regional collaboration and smart infrastructure investments based on the best available data.

“It has been my honor to represent my neighbors on the CCWD Board for 22 years,” said Burgh. “This Board operates at the highest level of transparency and accountability. I have learned so much from each of my colleagues and always appreciated the respectful discussions, especially when we had differing points of view.”

When asked about his decision to step down from the board, Burgh responded, “While a tough decision, CCWD is on a solid path investing in the next generation of water service with a collaborative Board and innovative staff. For my own personal reasons, this felt like the right time for me to step down and provide an opening for the next generation of water policy leaders.”

According to his bio on the CCWD website, Burgh is a retired engineer who has worked on water and wastewater projects throughout the world. He has a total of 42 years of experience in the administration, project management and design of public works projects.

For the last 30 years of his career, he worked for an environmental engineering consulting firm, where he retired as vice president.

Burgh holds a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Notre Dame and a master’s degree in management from the University of New Mexico. He is a registered civil engineer in California and an Air Force veteran.

He is a past President of the Contra Costa County Historical Society. A resident of Concord for over 35 years, he is a member of the Pleasant Hill Rotary Club and is a volunteer driver for Meals on Wheels, delivering meals to shut-in senior citizens in the area.

Director Burgh’s last day is March 31, and the Board will need to decide to fill the vacancy for Division 2 by appointment or election.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

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.

Contra Costa Taxpayers Association calls Supervisors’ ballot measure “Another Money Grab”

By Leave a Comment

5 years after raising sales tax with Measure X

By Denise P. Kalm, Contra Costa Taxpayers Association

Little more than five years after raising our sales taxes, the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors is going back to the well. On Tuesday, they voted unanimously to move forward with another sales tax increase, further increasing the costs of everyday essentials and making the County even more unaffordable for seniors and working families alike. (See related article)

Although Supervisors express pride over how 2020 Measure X sales tax revenue was spent, many of us question whether the money is going to core government functions. A recent oversight report listed these Measure X funded projects: Office of Racial Equity and Social Justice, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in Democracy Initiative, African American Holistic Wellness Center & Resource Hub and a Guaranteed Income Pilot. While many readers may agree with these projects, many taxpayers do not, and so they should be privately funded.

As the accompanying graph shows, County revenues have risen sharply in recent years with the passage of the Measure X and increased federal grants to County programs. When I quoted statistics from this graph, Supervisors questioned my accuracy, so let me assure them that the numbers come from the County’s own audited financial reports and budget.

Source: CoCoTax

A large share of the increase relates to Medi-Cal, a federal/state program that funds healthcare for low-income residents. Contra Costa County has aggressively involved itself in Medi-Cal, creating a pioneering Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) plan to provide care to Medi-Cal beneficiaries.

Between 2020 and 2025, the cost of Contra Costa County’s Medi-Cal Plan surged 157% from less than $900 million to almost $2.3 billion. A major contributor to this growth was the decision to extend Medi-Cal benefits to adult undocumented immigrants. According to state data, over 30,000 undocumented Contra Costa adults were receiving free healthcare through Medi-Cal last year.

Until recently, this was not a financial problem for the county because it was able to shift the cost onto the state and federal governments. But now this is becoming more difficult with Congressional Republicans, the Trump Administration and even the state government restricting reimbursements for undocumented immigrant coverage.

To continue growing this program, the Supervisors are now looking to residents to cover the tab by adding 0.625% to our sales taxes Countywide.

I realize that neighbors have a variety of views about immigration. Personally, I think the US should allow more of the talented people we need as well as a program to allow temporary, migrant workers to come here, which might go to support their request to immigrate here legally.

While I am for legal immigration, I do not agree that local communities should be on the hook to provide free medical care to anyone who comes here and completes an application. That policy is unsustainable, and unfair to the rest of us who pay a lot of money for healthcare. There are hundreds of millions of people around the world who would love to come to northern California and not have to worry about our high cost of living, including our high healthcare costs.

While I think we should welcome new neighbors, we should expect them to either shoulder the costs of living here or find friends, relatives, and charitable organizations that will help them do so.

Finally, the pro-tax side may portray your yes vote as a way to resist Trump and DC Republicans. But I urge you to hold two opinions simultaneously that may seem contradictory yet aren’t: you can hate the Administration’s hostile treatment of immigrants while also believing that local government should be fiscally responsible.  We have to manage our budgets carefully; those taking our tax money should be just as responsible.

If Supervisors are able to pass this sales tax in 2026 by a wide margin, there is every reason to think that they will come back for even more taxes in the years ahead with cities following them.  We already know that a transit sales tax increase of 0.5% is likely to be on the November ballot, another case of failing to manage BART and AC Transit money prudently.  So, I hope you’ll vote no in June, talk to your friends, and consider volunteering with our group to oppose this measure.

For more information about the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association visit www.cocotax.org.

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.

Candidate filing period now open for June 2, 2026 statewide direct primary election

By Leave a Comment

Includes statewide offices, Congress, State Assembly, County Supervisor and others

Deadline: March 6 unless incumbent chooses to not run for re-election

By Dawn Kruger, Community and Media Relations Coordinator, Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder-Elections Department 

Today, Monday, February 9, the Candidate Filing Period for the June 2, 2026, Statewide Direct Primary Election begins, and nomination papers will be available for candidates running for Statewide Constitutional offices, United States Representative in Congress, Member of the State Assembly, County offices and Superior Court Judges. The nomination period runs through 5:00 pm Friday, March 6, 2026, unless an incumbent chooses to not run for re-election. The deadline is then extended by five days to 5:00 pm Wednesday, March 11th.

Offices up for election include the statewide positions of Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Controller, Treasurer, Attorney General, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Insurance Commissioner and Board of Equalization, District 2. Plus, elections for the House of Representatives, State Assembly, Board of Supervisors, Districts 1 and 4, Assessor, Auditor-Controller, Clerk-Recorder, Treasurer-Tax Collector and County Superintendent of Schools  will be held in June, as well.

A list of offices currently up for election can be found here: www.contracostavote.gov/wp-content/uploads/26Jun02_PositionsUpForElection_OfficeOnly.pdf

Papers for offices that are up for election will be available at the Contra Costa Elections Office, located at 555 Escobar Street, Martinez. County Elections staff are working with the City Clerk in Richmond to help implement the electoral reform passed by the voters of Richmond in 2024 requiring candidates for City Council and Mayor to file with the City of Richmond and run in the Primary.

For further information on the primary election and key dates, go to www.contracostavote.gov

“Election activities for the 2026 Primary are ramping up in Contra Costa County,” said Kristin B. Connelly, Contra Costa Registrar of Voters. “Candidate filing is an important first step in the election process, and our Candidate Services team is prepared to guide prospective candidates through key deadlines, requirements, and resources as they consider running for public office.”

Interested candidates can schedule an appointment through email at candidate.services@vote.cccounty.us or by calling 925-335-7800. Walk-ins are accepted, but subject to the availability of staff. Appointments are available on weekdays from 8:30 am to 4:30 pm. Filing documents and information will be provided to interested constituents at their appointment. The process takes approximately 20 minutes.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Congressman DeSaulnier to host Town Hall in Pleasant Hill Feb. 7

By Leave a Comment

Will speak about efforts to impeach Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, other matters

By Mairead Glowacki, Communications Director, Office of Congressman Mark DeSaulnier

Walnut Creek, CA – Today, Congressman Mark DeSaulnier (D, CA-10) announced he will host a town hall in Pleasant Hill on Saturday, February 7th from 12:30 – 1:30 p.m. PT. At this event, the Congressman will speak to his efforts to rein in illegal actions by the Trump Administration, including his support for impeaching Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, and his work in Congress to lower costs for American families. He will also take questions from constituents.

Town Hall in Pleasant Hill

Saturday, February 7th

12:30 – 1:30 p.m.

Pleasant Hill, CA

The event is RSVP only and capacity is limited. To reserve your spot and receive the address of the event, or to request special accommodations, visit https://desaulnier.house.gov/town-hall-rsvp or call (925) 933-2660.

This will be Congressman DeSaulnier’s 257th town hall and mobile district office hour since first serving Congress in January 2015. The 10th Congressional District currently includes most of Contra Costa County.

Connect Bay Area campaign raises nearly $3 million to support signature gathering for regional transit tax measure

By 1 Comment

Multiple Bay Area transit agencies would benefit from the five-county sales tax measure. Photo: MTC. Graphics source: Connect Bay Area

Businesses, labor unions, civic foundations join effort for 5-county Nov. 2026 ballot measure to prevent threatened catastrophic transit service cuts, promote reliable, safe public transit

Includes Contra Costa; would generate about $1 billion per year

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA, CA — The Connect Bay Area Transit committee today announced that it has already raised nearly $3 million to support a region-wide effort to qualify Connect Bay Area, a voter-proposed regional transportation funding measure, for the November 2026 ballot. With strong early financial backing secured, the campaign will now begin signature gathering while continuing to fundraise to qualify and pass a five-county sales tax to save public transit.

About the Tax Measure

The measure if adopted would increase the sales tax in Contra Costa, Alameda San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties by a half cent and one cent in San Francisco County for 14 years. As previously reported, the measure would generate approximately $980 million annually across the five counties.

Revenue from the tax measure will benefit multiple transit agencies in the region including Tri Delta Transit, County Connection and WestCat, as well as AC Transit and BART which serve Contra Costa County residents.

Following is a county-by-county breakdown of the County Specific Dollars. It does not include money going to BART, Muni, AC Transit and Caltrain, or to regional improvements that aren’t designated by county, such as coordinated fare programs and accessibility improvements.

County Agencies:

  • Contra Costa County Transportation Authority (2.5%, $26.51M)
  • Alameda County Transportation Commission (1%, $10.26M)
  • San Mateo County Transit District (4.7%, $50M)
  • Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (25.1%, $264.07M)

Small Operators:

  • Contra Costa County small operators (1.5%, $15.75M)
  • Alameda County small operators (0.5%, $5.25M)
  • SF Bay Ferry (0.7%, $7M)
  • Golden Gate Transit (0.1%, $1M)

Without new and sustainable operations funding, the Bay Area will face a true emergency:

  • BART: Could shut down two of its five lines, reducing service from 4,500 trains per week to just 500, with trains running only hourly and no weekend service.
  • AC Transit: Would reduce service by 37%, bringing operations down to just half of pre-pandemic levels.
  • Muni: Would face 50% cuts to all bus and Metro lines, including elimination of entire neighborhood routes and San Francisco’s iconic historic trolleys and cable cars.
  • Caltrain: Trains would run only once per hour, end service by 9 p.m. on weekdays, and eliminate all weekend service.

The Connect Bay Area measure will support the future of public transportation in the Bay Area:

  • Protect and improve service on BART, Muni, Caltrain, SamTrans, VTA and AC Transit
  • Prevent catastrophic service cuts that could devastate the Bay Area
  • Keep traffic and emissions down, preventing gridlock and protecting climate progress;
  • Support the Bay Area’s economy, ensuring that downtown recovery and regional mobility remain strong.

The Connect Bay Area Transit measure will include strong accountability provisions. This ensures new funding delivers real improvements, not just short-term fixes. Transit agencies must:

  • Independent financial review and cost-efficiency: Operators will undergo a third-party financial review and be required to improve financial efficiency and use public funds wisely
  • Better regional coordination to benefit riders: Operators will be required to comply with MTC’s Regional Network Management Policies to coordinate across systems and simplify fares and signage to create a more seamless experience for riders.
  • Oversight Committee: An oversight committee will ensure that the expenditure plan is adhered to and hold MTC and operators accountable to all provisions of SB63.

About the Campaign

The campaign’s initial fundraising success reflects broad alignment across business, labor, philanthropy, and community leaders that a reliable, safe, and efficient public transportation system is vital to the future of the Bay Area. Major early donors include Chris Larsen, Herzog Contracting Corporation, Genentech, HNTB Corporation, Meta, and SEIU 1021. For a full list of donors, see below.

“Public transportation connects everyone. We are proud of the broad coalition uniting to prevent catastrophic service cuts and to build an affordable, safe, and efficient public transportation system,” said Jeff Cretan, a spokesperson for the Connect Bay Area Transit Committee. “The commitments we are seeing from business, labor, and civic leaders shows that everyone is ready to get this measure across the finish line in November.”

Connect Bay Area is a five-county regional tax measure designed to prevent catastrophic transit service cuts and provide reliable operating funding for major transit systems and local bus operators throughout the region. The measure also funds improvements to transit systems, capital projects within counties, and targeted road improvements. The measure is critical to supporting the Bay Area’s economy, promoting an affordable region, reducing traffic congestion, and ensuring access to jobs, schools, and healthcare.

Early financial support for the campaign includes commitments from:

  • Chris Larsen
  • Herzog Contracting Corporation
  • Genentech
  • HNTB Corporation
  • Meta
  • SEIU 1021
  • Jacobs
  • Silicon Valley Community Foundation
  • ATU Local 1555
  • PG&E
  • San Francisco Foundation
  • WSP
  • Golden State Warriors
  • AFSCME Local 3993
  • Boston Properties
  • Visa
  • AFSCME Council 57
  • T.Y. Lin
  • GILLIG
  • HDR, Inc.
  • Fehr & Peers
  • AFSCME 3916
  • Arup North America
  • Olson Remcho

Additional major employers, labor organizations, and philanthropic partners have indicated commitments that are expected to be finalized as the campaign continues to build momentum.

With signature gathering starting, the Connect Bay Area campaign will focus on qualifying the measure for the ballot while continuing to expand its coalition across the region. The Campaign must secure over 186,000 signatures from the five counties by June 6, 2026 to qualify for the November ballot.

The campaign’s early momentum comes as Bay Area transit agencies face an unprecedented funding crisis. Without a sustainable solution, public transportation in the the region could see devastating impacts, including:

  • BART could eliminate 2 full lines, stop service at 9pm on weekdays, and eliminate all weekend service.
  • Muni could eliminate entire routes, make 50% cuts to major bus and metro lines, gut historic train and cable car service.
  • Caltrain could cut weekday service to once an hour, stop service at 9pm on weekdays, and eliminate all weekend service.
  • AC Transit could cut up to 37% of overall service.

Recent polling on the proposed Connect Bay Area measure shows a clear path to passage, with strong support across counties and voter demographics. A survey conducted by EMC Research for the Metropolitan Transportation Commission found that 59% of Bay Area voters would support a proposed regional sales tax measure for public transportation. The threshold for passage for a signature-gathering initiative is 50%+1.

For more information about Connect Bay Area, visit ConnectBayArea.com.

About the Connect Bay Area Transit Committee

The Connect Bay Area Transit Committee is led by labor, business, and transit supporters, including the Bay Area Council, SEIU 1021, ATU 1555, SPUR, SAMCEDA, among others, as well as a broad advocacy council. The advocacy council includes more than 20 organizations including transit advocates, housing advocates, safe streets advocates, senior and disability advocates, and environmentalists. The Committee is focused on delivering a successful 2026 ballot measure that will strengthen public transportation to keep the Bay Area affordable for residents and support critical economic growth and climate resilience.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.