• Home
  • About The Herald
  • Local Agencies
  • Daily Email Update
  • Legal Notices
  • Classified Ads

Contra Costa Herald

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

  • Arts & Entertainment
  • Business
  • Community
  • Crime
  • Dining
  • Education
  • Faith
  • Health
  • News
  • Politics & Elections
  • Real Estate

BART’s $3.5 billion bond measure for repair, maintenance and upgrades of system on November ballot

July 11, 2016 By Publisher Leave a Comment

BART photo

By Allen Payton

In June, the BART Board voted 9-0 to place a $3.5 billion bond measure on the November ballot to provide funding for repair and maintenance of and upgrades to the existing system. The measure will appear on ballots in the three counties of Contra Costa, Alameda and San Francisco that make up the BART District, and requires a two-thirds vote to pass.

The system improvements will take 21 years to complete, according to the brochure about the measure. To see the brochure, click here: BetterBART_Brochure

“BART anticipates that the 2016 System Renewal Program Plan will be implemented over the course of twenty-one years, commencing in Fiscal Year 2017 and concluding in Fiscal Year 2038. Projects will be accelerated as practical to maximize the benefit of planned improvements as quickly as possible.”

However, the bonds will take as long as 50 years to pay off.

“We’re not likely to sell $3.5 billion of bonds in the first year or even the first 10 years,” stated BART Director Joel Keller, who represents Concord and Eastern Contra Costa County.  “There are laws that you spend bond proceeds before you issue more bonds. What we’ll do is sell the bonds in what’s called tranches. Let’s say the first tranche is $1 billion and it takes us five to 10 years to spend that money. That tranche will last 30 years. If we do that three or four times, that could take the final payment out years. That’s really an unknown. It could take 40 to 50 years. It will be 30 years after the last bond is sold.”

According to a BART press release, “Estimates show the bond will cost Alameda, Contra Costa and San Francisco county homeowners less than a pack of gum a week.” More specifically, the cost will increase the average property tax bill by $37.21 per year in Contra Costa County if the measure is approved, according to Keller.

The annual cost is based on the appraised of property values, both residential and similar to the BART earthquake retrofit bond measure, which is what property owners are currently paying on the property tax bills.

For the BART earthquake safety measure, which voters approved in 2004, the projected annual cost was between $4.85 and $12.65 per $100,000 of assessed value. However, the actually cost was $2.60 to $9 per $100,000 of assessed value.

“It’s an ad valorem tax with a fixed cost to pay off the bonds,” Keller explained. “So, if property values increase, the cost per $100,000 decrease.”

The 2016 bond measure is projected to cost $8.98 per $100,000 of assessed value. So a property in Contra Costa County with an average value of $414,399 will be assessed $37.21 per year.

Use of Bond Proceeds

The use of funds from the bond measure is split into two categories, according to the BART System Renewal Program Plan 2016.

Repair and Replace Critical Safety Infrastructure – $3.165 billion, 90.43%

“We want to upgrade our computer equipment from Pong-era technology to a modern train control system—which means less waiting for trains on crowded platforms and less frustration from delays. New maintenance facilities will keep the maximum number of cars out serving customers, so that fewer cars clog our congested highways,” from “The Plan” brochure about the measure.

This category is further divided into six sub-categories, with explanations in the brochure.

Renew Power System – $1.225 billion, 35%

Replacing Worn Track – $625 million, 17.85%

Waterproofing & Repairing Tunnels & Structures – $570 million, 16.29%

Modernizing & Replacing Train Control – $400 million, 11.43%

Renovating Stations – $210 million, 6%

Renewing Mechanical Infastructure – $135 million, 3.86%

Safer Station Access – $335 million, 9.57%

Design Future Projects to Reduce Crowding & Reduce Traffic Congestion – $200 million, 5.71%

Expand Opportunities to Safely Access Stations – $135 million, 3.86%

The bond measure brochure clearly states No general operating expenditures: The proceeds of the bond measure cannot be used to support BART’s general operating needs, but must be dedicated to the capital program outlined in this Program Plan.” Therefore none of the funds can be used for employee salaries or benefits.

According to a press release from BART:

The bond measure is a key funding component of BART’s plan to rebuild and renew its aging system, which faces increasing problems as various physical parts of the 44-year-old railway reach the end of their useful lives.  The plan replaces and repairs 90 miles of deteriorating tracks and other aging infrastructure in order to maintain BART’s excellent safety record and protects our environment by keeping thousands of cars off the road.

“This bond measure is practical; it’s dedicated to fixing what we have,” said Board President Tom Radulovich. “We have a responsibility to keep our system safe and reliable while getting the maximum value out of taxpayers’ investment.”

Over the past year, BART’s community outreach department has held over 230 community meetings with local stakeholders and civic groups to ensure widespread understanding of BART’s needs, and to hear the public’s thoughts about its capital reinvestment program.

Due to record-breaking ridership, BART has been able to find funding for many of the solutions needed to increase capacity, meet modern demand, relieve crowding, and upgrade the system.  That includes the newly arriving Fleet of the Future, the Hayward Maintenance Complex, and some of the groundwork for a cutting-edge train control system.

However, the cost of the capital projects needed to repair, fix, and replace worn rail, leaking tunnels, unreliable track circuitry, and failing power transmission equipment outpaces revenue growth.  BART’s plan is to dedicate funds from the bond measure solely to fixing what we have first – without earmarks, pet projects, or frills.

If voters choose to pass the measure in November, great care will be taken to ensure the public’s money is protected and spent wisely.  An independent audit committee will be commissioned to publish regular, transparent reports on how the money is being spent, with open, frequent and public meetings.

BART has proven itself to be a prudent and effective steward of public bond funds in the past, executing its 2004 Earthquake Safety and Retrofitting effort under budget with better and more robust results than expected.

Public transportation continues to be at the intersection of many of the great issues facing cities in the 21st century – and voters were wise in choosing to build such an extraordinary work as BART back in 1962.  Since then, BART has been a staple of this region’s culture, workforce, and values. As both riders and service providers, BART appreciates and is deeply grateful for the opportunity to connect residents to the people and places they care about.

Kerry Hamill, Government Relations Manager for BART offered additional comments regarding the cost and length of the bond measure, in response to an editorial by Dan Borenstein published in the East Bay Times:

The East Bay Times editorialist’s headline – that our bond measure will cost double what we are saying – is flatly incorrect, a conclusion drawn from a selective interpretation of our analysis. In order to assist BART’s Board of Directors in making an informed executive decision, a variety of scenarios were created with different variables relevant to particular presentations. The East Bay Times piece incorrectly appropriated data from these scenarios, resulting in an inaccurate characterization of the bond’s effects. BART has long taken care to illustrate the repayment structure of this bond in a standardized way; we have been doing so through all our exhibits and resolutions since the Board discussions began in earnest this past February.

The editorial also takes issue with how staff described the bond to the Board of Directors and the public, claiming we provided inaccurate information out of either incompetence or deceit – a charge which has absolutely no merit. Bonds are issued over time in subsets called tranches, each lasting 30 years (hence the name ’30-year bond’). This is done to coordinate the timing of bond issuance as closely as possible with construction progress payments, which minimizes interest costs and keeps the annual tax rates as low as possible – a prudent and responsible financial management practice. The editorialist was given this point of clarification multiple times as he repeatedly misrepresented the meaning of a ’30-year bond’ to mean the total span of time property owners would be paying – a false claim BART has never made. We were disappointed to see the author’s misunderstanding make the final printing, despite our best efforts.

The bond measure is projected to cost between $0.80 and $17.49 per $100,000 of a property’s assessed value, for a weighted average of $8.98 per $100,000 over the life of the bond – and for further explanation, that minimum and maximum range is based on the structure of BART’s projected debt service. The editorial’s repeated point that BART made a mathematical error in not compounding the increase in AV is also flatly incorrect, based on a misunderstanding of how the cost of bonds increase or decrease over time. The more the District’s assessed value increases (as housing supply, ownership changes, improvements increase), the lower the rate property owners would pay as the cost is spread over a larger base of assessed values. Furthermore, our models and estimates are built on the assumption of a 4% yearly increase in assessed value. $3.5B Scenario C Tax Rate At 4% AV Escalation

This is not our first bond – when the Earthquake Safety measure went before voters in 2004, the District projected that rates would vary between $4.85 to $12.79 per $100,000 of a property’s assessed value. Since approval, the actual annual cost has ranged between $2.60 (current year) and $9.00 per $100,000 of assessed value. Contrary to popular opinion, we have a proven track record of responsible fiscal stewardship. $3.5B Bond Financing

Concerned property owners are encouraged to do their own math for the sake of accuracy: $8.98 per $100,000 of assessed property value. When we provide averages for particular scenarios, we run the risk of appearing to conceal changes in amounts due to the many variables that can be introduced. Our goal is to provide people with a general understanding of a complex issue based on the best information available, which we have done and will continue to do. We are a transparent organization with deep ties to the community, and have held hundreds of meetings to ensure people understand what this bond is and how it will work. In that vein, we appreciate the opportunity to draw attention to our plan to rebuild the core of the BART system for improved safety, reliability, and traffic congestion relief.

Complete details of what is in the bond and how it relates to safety, reliability, and relief of traffic congestion can be found at bart.gov/betterbart.

Filed Under: BART, News, Politics & Elections

Voter fraud discovered in Contra Costa County, officials blame Secretary of State decision

July 9, 2016 By Publisher Leave a Comment

Elections Division officials discover 113 voters successfully cast two ballots in June election

As a result of an emergency accommodation to the California Secretary of State’s office, the Contra Costa County Elections Division has discovered that 113 registered voters voted twice and had both ballots counted during the June 7th Presidential Primary Election.

The Contra Costa Elections Division plans to send those voter fraud cases to the Contra Costa District Attorney’s office, Registrar of Voters Joe Canciamilla said.

Elections Division staff will also send recommendations to the Secretary of State’s office requesting a change in their practices for surrendering vote-by-mail ballots.

Contra Costa County’s long standing practice in administering state Election Code 3016 has been to issue provisional ballots to all vote-by-mail voters who surrender their ballots at a polling place. Part of the reason this practice is in place is to prevent voter fraud.

The process of surrendering a ballot as it is currently written does not provide a means of detecting or preventing this type of fraud until it is too late.

The County is urging Secretary of State Alex Padilla to seek urgency legislation or work with counties to eliminate this vulnerability in the election process for the November election.

Filed Under: News, Politics & Elections

McNerney to face Amador for Congress, again in November General Election

June 13, 2016 By Publisher Leave a Comment

By Allen Payton

In a rematch of the 2014 election for Congress in District 9, Democrat Representative Jerry McNerney will face retired U.S. Marshall Tony Amador in the November election.

After entering the race on the last day possible, Amador edged out fellow Republican candidate, Stockton Police Sergeant Kathryn Nance, who had been campaigning for over a year, by 2.9% of the vote.

“I want to thank those who supported me,” Amador said. “We’re going to need the help of independent and Democrat voters, and Kathryn’s supporters, as well.”

“I want to congratulate her for fighting the fight,” he added.

The latest vote count, as of Friday, June 10th at 6:47 p.m., McNerney had 50,144 votes or 55.7%, Amador had 19,644 votes or 21.8%, Nance had 16,975 votes or 18.9% and Libertarian Alex Appleby had 3,218 votes or 3.6% of the vote.

District 9 includes most of Eastern Contra Costa County, as well as most of San Joaquin County, plus Galt in Sacramento County.

Amador is leading Nance by only 435 votes in San Joaquin County where they both live, but in the Contra Costa portion of the district he’s leading her by 1,907 votes and by 327 votes in Galt.

To see the the election results as they’re updated, visit the California Secretary of State’s website at: http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/us-rep/district/9/

 

Filed Under: East County, News, Politics & Elections

Glover, Avila Farias in November run-off in race for District 5 Supervisor

June 10, 2016 By Publisher Leave a Comment

By Allen Payton

While the County Elections Office continues to count ballots and provide updates, it’s clear that both Supervisor Federal Glover and Martinez Councilwoman Anamarie Avila Farias have taken the top two spots in the race for District 5 Supervisor, and will be in the November run-off.

County Elections Office staff stated they had 56,000 ballots in the county left to count as of Wednesday, not including 19,000 provisional ballots nor those ballots that were postmarked by Tuesday and received by today.

As of the Thursday afternoon vote count update, Glover holds the top spot with 10,443 votes which is 35.26% of the votes and Avila Farias is in second with 9,197 votes which is 31.05%. Trailing in a distant third is former Martinez Mayor Mike Menesini with 4,339 votes or 14.65%, Hercules Mayor Dan Romero with 3,930 votes or 13.27% and then Conrad Dandridge with 1,604 votes or 5.42%.

Avila Farias received a large boost of support from both the firefighters and the deputy sheriffs in the county, with over $68,000 spent on her behalf.

The Elections Office has 28 days to certify the election and is expected to provide another update, later today and more next week, as the remaining ballots are counted.

Following are the results from the County Elections website as of Thursday, June 9, 4:04 p.m.:

ANAMARIE AVILA FARIAS   9,197   31.05%
CONRAD DANDRIDGE   1,604     5.42%
MICHAEL MENESINI   4,339   14.65%
FEDERAL GLOVER (I) 10,443   35.26%
DAN ROMERO   3,930   13.27%
WRITE-IN      107     0.36%
Total 29,620

Filed Under: Central County, East County, News, Politics & Elections, West County

Barr, Burgis expand leads in Thursday’s District 3 Supervisor race vote count update

June 9, 2016 By Publisher Leave a Comment

By Allen Payton

An update on the Contra Costa County Elections Office website on Thursday, June 09, 2016 at 4:04 p.m. shows Brentwood City Councilman Steve Barr expanding his lead over East Bay Regional Parks District Board Member Diane Burgis, to 1,930 votes. Burgis expanded her lead over Oakley Councilman Doug Hardcastle to 1,227 votes, with about an additional 4,000 votes counted since Tuesday night.

Barr has secured his place in the November run-off. If the trend continues as the remaining ballots are counted, Burgis will have secured her place, as well, as the top two finishers face off in the General Election.

The latest vote counts and percentages are as follows:

ODESSA LEFRANCOIS 1,787 5.73%
DIANE BURGIS 7,044 22.57%
STEVE BARR 9,014 28.88%
MONICA E WILSON 2,798 8.97%
DOUGLAS F. HARDCASTLE 5,817 18.64%
WADE HARPER 4,684 15.01%
WRITE-IN 66 0.21%
Total 31,210

Filed Under: East County, Politics & Elections, San Ramon Valley

Election for District 3 Supervisor may not yet be over, about 56,000 ballots left to count

June 8, 2016 By Publisher 1 Comment

By Allen Payton

Election results from Tuesday night show Brentwood Councilman Steve Barr in a commanding first place lead and East Bay Regional Parks District Board Member in second place in the race for District 3 Supervisor. But, the battle for second place to determine who will face Barr in the run-off election in November may not yet be decided.

Oakley Councilman Doug Hardcastle trails Burgis by just 1,025 votes and according to County Elections Office staff, there are still about 56,000 vote-by-mail ballots in the county, turned in at the polls, Tuesday that are left to be counted. That figure does not include an additional 19,000 provisional ballots, plus the ballots turned in to the 19 City Clerks’ offices, on Tuesday, nor those ballots postmarked by Tuesday and received by this Friday.

All the ballots of those who voted at the polls were counted and included in Tuesday night’s totals.

According to the County Elections website, the results for the District 3 race as of Tuesday night are as follows:

Steve Barr – 7,996 votes, 28.9%

Diane Burgis – 6,136 votes, 22.2%

Doug Hardcastle – 5,109 votes, 18.49%

Wade Harper – 4,234 votes, 15.32%

Monica Wilson – 2,516 votes, 9.11%

Odessa Lefrancois – 1,584 votes, 5.73%

Vote counts will be updated as the County Elections office has them, with the first one expected on Friday.

Filed Under: East County, Politics & Elections, San Ramon Valley

Hardcastle maintains lead in finances in District 3 Supervisor race, Burgis leads in monetary contributions, is second in spending

June 7, 2016 By Publisher Leave a Comment

By Allen Payton

The final financial reports were due on Friday, June 2 for the candidates in races for Contra Costa County Supervisor. In District 3, Oakley Councilman Doug Hardcastle continues to maintain his lead in total contributions and total expenses. East Bay Regional Parks District Board Member Diane Burgis shows the most in monetary contributions. Brentwood Councilman Steve Barr is in second in that category. But, Burgis shows the second most spent during the campaign and the most in outstanding debts.

Below is the summary of the campaign finances based on the latest reporting (please see copies of their reports at the bottom of this story):

Doug Hardcastle

Monetary Contributions Received during the period: $1,300

Loans Received during the period: $1,000

Non-Monetary Contributions Received: $1,400

Total Contributions Received for the period: $3,700 (1st)

Monetary Contributions Received during the campaign: $27,308.16 (4th)

Total Contributions during the campaign: $52,633.16 (1st)

Payments Made during period: $2,511.13

Accrued Expenses (unpaid bills) for the period: $ -0-

Total Expenditures Made during the campaign: $52,155.00 (1st)

Ending Cash Balance: $478.16

Outstanding Debts: $16,500 (2nd) – all loans from himself

Hardcastle submitted two amended reports showing $700 in additional monetary contributions and a $750 in-kind contribution not previously reported.

 

Steve Barr

Monetary Contributions Received during the period: $2,567

Loans Received during the period: $ -0-

Non-Monetary Contributions Received: $ -0-

Total Contributions Received for the period: $2,567 (2nd)

Monetary Contributions Received during the campaign: $30,352 (2nd)

Total Contributions during the campaign: $40,752 (3rd)

Expenditures Made during period: $ -0-

Total Expenditures Made during the campaign: $38,768 (3rd)

Ending Cash Balance: $3,984

Outstanding Debts: $7,000 (3rd) – $5,000 in loans from himself

Barr submitted an amended report showing a change from an in-kind contribution of $450 to an Accrued Expense.

 

Diane Burgis

Monetary Contributions Received during the period: $2,000

Loans Received during the period: $  -0-

Non-Monetary Contributions Received: $ -0-

Total Contributions Received for the period: $2,000 (4th)

Monetary Contributions Received during the campaign: $31,655 (1st)

Total Contributions during the campaign: $31,755 (3rd)

Expenditures Made during period: $8,137.80

Accrued Expenses (unpaid bills) for the period: $23,370.06

Total Expenditures Made during the campaign: $50,043.18 (2nd)

Ending Cash Balance: $5,082.43

Outstanding Debts: $23,470.06 (1st) – $100 in a loan from herself

 

Monica Wilson

Monetary Contributions Received during period: $2,095

Loans Received during the period: $  -0-

Non-Monetary Contributions received: $ -0-

Total Contributions Received for the period: $2,095 (3rd)

Monetary Contributions Received during the campaign: $29,170.92 (3rd)

Total Contributions for the campaign: $31,216.86 (4th)

Expenditures Made during period: $5,254.59 paid down previous unpaid bills of $1,874.98

Accrued Expenses (unpaid bills) for the period: $ -0-

Total Expenditures Made during the campaign: $34,470.54 (4th)

Ending Cash Balance of $3,175.32

Outstanding Debts: $1,250 (4th)

 

Odessa Lefrancois

Monetary Contributions Received during period: $ -0-

Loans Received during the period: $  -0-

Non-Monetary Contributions received: $   -0-

Total Contributions Received for the period: $  -0-

Monetary Contributions Received during the campaign: $13,025.00 (5th)

Total Contributions for the campaign: $13,025.00 (5th)

Expenditures Made during period: $2,312.22

Accrued Expenses (unpaid bills) for the period: $ -0-

Total Expenditures Made during the campaign: $11,590.02 (5th)

Ending Cash Balance of $1,434.98

Outstanding Debts: $ -0-

She will have to file an amended report, as hers once again, does not show the Year to Date Totals on the Summary page.

 

Wade Harper

Monetary Contributions Received during period: $ -0-

Non-Monetary Contributions received: $   -0-

Total Contributions Received for the period: $ -0-

Monetary Contributions Received during the campaign: $9,725.00 (6th)

Total Contributions for the campaign: $9,725.00 (6th)

Expenditures Made during period: $ -0-

Accrued Expenses (unpaid bills) for the period: $ -0-

Total Expenditures Made during the campaign: $8,950.54 (6th)

Ending Cash Balance of $774.46

Outstanding Debts: $ -0-

Publisher’s Note: For full disclosure and as explained in the March issue of the Antioch Herald, I, the writer of this article, am the paid consultant for Doug Hardcastle’s campaign for County Supervisor.

Barr 460 0522-060216

Barr Amend 0424-052116

Burgis 460 0522-060216

Hardcastle 460 0522-060216

Hardcastle Amend 0101-042316

Hardcastle Amend 0424-052116

Harper 460 0522-060216

Lefrancios 460 0522-060316

Wilson 460 0522-060216

Filed Under: East County, News, Politics & Elections, San Ramon Valley

Former President Bill Clinton to be in Antioch to campaign for Hillary, Monday

June 5, 2016 By Publisher 1 Comment

By Allen Payton

It has been confirmed by Jeff Koertzen, Chair of the Democratic Party of Contra Costa County, that former President Bill Clinton will be in Antioch on Monday, June 6th to campaign for his wife Hillary in her bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Reports have been circulating since Thursday that campaign staff were at Nuce Nuce Deli, in Waldie Plaza in Antioch’s downtown, looking for a location for the event.

UPDATE: The event will be held at Marsh Elementary School, 2304 G Street, Antioch at 2:00 p.m. Doors open at 1:00 p.m.

 

Filed Under: News, Politics & Elections

Early voting locations in Contra Costa County open 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m, today

June 4, 2016 By Publisher Leave a Comment

Contra Costa County voters can receive and cast their ballots at seven Regional Early Voting sites throughout the county before Election Day.

Regional Early Voting sites are structured so that any registered Contra Costa voter can vote at any location. For example, a Concord resident who works at Bishop Ranch in San Ramon can vote at the site in either of those cities.

The Regional Early Voting sites will be open for voting on Saturday, June 4th from 9:00 am to 3:00 pm.

The sites are geographically balanced and are located in convenient and accessible locations.

  • Prewett Water Park Multi-Purpose Room, 4701 Lone Tree Way, Antioch
  • Bay Hills Community Church, 4100 Klose Way, Richmond
  • Lafayette Learning Center, 3491 Mt. Diablo Blvd., Lafayette
  • San Ramon Community Center at Central Park, 12501 Alcosta Blvd., San Ramon
  • Pittsburg City Hall, 65 Civic Ave., Pittsburg
  • The Salvation Army Church, 3950 Clayton Road, Concord

In addition to the Regional Voting Center sites, vote-by-mail voters can continue to drop off their ballots at “CoCo Vote-N-Go” drop-off boxes at all 19 city hall buildings and the County Administration building on 651 Pine Street, Martinez.

For more information on Regional Early Voting, visit www.cocovote.us.

Filed Under: News, Politics & Elections

Most candidates at District 3 Supervisors forum support fire tax hike, one opposed

May 31, 2016 By Publisher Leave a Comment

By Dave Roberts

One of the biggest problems facing East County residents is the lack of adequate fire protection and emergency services. Most of the candidates for county supervisor representing District 3, which includes East County, favor raising taxes to beef up staffing in the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District. Only one candidate, Doug Hardcastle, has publicly opposed a fire tax hike.

ECCFPD voters have twice rejected fire tax hike measures in recent years. In 2012 a 10-year parcel tax hike, which required two-thirds approval to pass, failed to gain even a majority. In 2015 a benefit assessment, which needed a majority to pass, also failed with 53 percent of voters rejecting it. The district may place another tax hike measure on the November ballot.

In 2008 the fire district was able to staff six fire stations with 48 employees on a $10.8 million budget. But the current $12.1 million budget – a 12 percent increase in funding – only provides for 36 employees and staffing for three fire stations. This has resulted in longer response times, particularly in outlying areas, putting East County residents’ lives and property at risk.

The reason that a 12 percent budget increase in the past eight years has resulted in layoffs and station closures is that employee salary and benefit costs have risen even faster, 15 percent. Most significantly, retirement expenses have increased 64 percent from $2.2 million in 2008 to $3.6 million today.

Four of the six candidates seeking to replace Mary Piepho on the county board of supervisors – Steve Barr, Diane Burgis, Hardcastle and Odessa Lefrancois – discussed the fire district problem at a recent forum in Discovery Bay. The other two candidates – Wade Harper and Monica Wilson – failed to show due to family emergencies, according to Greg Robinson, publisher of the Brentwood Press, which sponsored the forum.

The candidates responded to this question: “Fire protection in East County is an ongoing concern. Despite the fact that there are three stations open with a fourth scheduled to open in July, the voters still turned down a recent tax initiative to support and reopen stations. What do you see as the solution to the ongoing funding for the district, and how can the supervisors help?”

Brentwood City Councilman Barr is the only candidate who has sat on the ECCFPD board, where he’s now in his fourth year.

“I know firsthand what the issues are out here,” he said. “The simple fact is there is not enough funding to fund more than three fire stations. It’s about $2.8 million per station, and the current funding from your property taxes is somewhere around $10 or $11 million. So as you can see, you’re not going to get anything more than three stations.”

The fire board has conducted a study, which determined that the 250-square-mile district actually needs nine fire stations to provide adequate protection, said Barr. He did not do the math at the forum, but nine stations at $2.8 million per station would total $25 million, more than double the district’s current budget.

“So I think we’re on the right track,” he said, adding that he’s “hopeful” about the next tax measure.

Barr did not mention Piepho by name, but he criticized the lack of leadership provided by the county supervisor on the issue.

“The supervisor of this county needs to step up and be the one leading, not the city manager of the city of Brentwood [who is chairing a task force],” he said. “I’m happy he’s doing it because he’s actually looking for solutions, like we all have. And I think that’s exactly what I would expect out of the county supervisors. Not leave it all to one of the cities, but actually leading and showing leadership and finding solutions.”

Oakley City Councilman Hardcastle said the solution is not another tax hike attempt.

“We’ve had enough studies,” he said. “People do not want to raise their taxes again. They tried it twice already. It’s ridiculous that they would even try it twice. We pay too much money. We just need to learn how to spend our money properly where it needs to be spent. I’m there to make sure that that money gets spent like that.

“I’ve been in business for 40-something years,” Hardcastle continued. “You don’t stay in business for 40-something years by spending money needlessly on stuff that it doesn’t need to be spent on. So my number one priority is going to be conservancy of the money to make sure that our dollars are spent like we want them to spend it.”

Hardcastle did not provide specifics on how he would like to reallocate the fire district’s budget, but said something needs to be done, including increasing salaries.

“Our fire stations out here are in horrible shape,” he said. “These guys are overworked; a lot of them are underpaid. I talked to one guy, he’s [making] $20 an hour being a fireman. That is ridiculous.”

One possibility is continuing the temporary funding provided to the fire district by the county and the cities of Brentwood and Oakley that has allowed the Knightsen station to be reopened through June 2017.

“My number one priority in this whole thing is having our families be safe,” said Hardcastle.  “We can get money from our budgets at the city.”

Lefrancois, who is a past president of the East County NAACP, also favors other government agencies pitching in to help the fire district.

“As a supervisor I’d like to bring all of the concerned parties to the table to try to figure this out,” she said. “This needs to be figured out not just by the county board of supervisor[s], but also by the county board of education and also special district[s] who also have funding on safety that goes into their budget[s].”

Lefrancois also agrees with Barr that another tax hike attempt should be studied. “Maybe we need to figure out from the voters what type of tax, if there is a parcel tax, what would they be willing to pay, what would they be willing to do,” she said. “I think this is a very complex issue, and it needs more than just one individual at the table making that decision.”

East Bay Regional Park District board member Burgis also wants to look at the possibility of another tax hike measure. “We need to find more revenue,” she said. “That can be different tools. That can be property tax, it can be reallocation, it can be consolidation. It can be a whole combination of things. But it has to be legal. And it has to be something that we make urgent.”

She did not mention Barr by name, but criticized the fire board’s efforts thus far.

“The problem has been the leadership on this fire board hasn’t done the job,” said Burgis. “So we need to figure out what hasn’t worked and stop that and move forward. We need to have a more accountable fire protection board. I think that having an elected board that is responsible for the district is a good step.”

Burgis agreed with Barr that there needs to be county leadership on the issue.

“As a supervisor we are one part of three parts: Oakley, Brentwood and the county,” she said. “And as supervisor I would be that leader. I would bring those people together. That’s the reputation I have is bringing people together that have different opinions, politics and agendas and making sure that we do what we need to do. … It’s a problem that we need to deal with.”

On other issues, the candidates mostly agreed that:

  • The proposed Delta tunnels project should be opposed because it would degrade water quality.
  • Development of the Byron Airport could be an economic boon to East County.
  • There is a need to attract more businesses to East County to provide local jobs.
  • Local farmland needs to be protected.
  • Crime, including shootings on Highway 4, needs to be reduced.

The election is June 7th. If no candidate receives more than 50 percent of the vote, then the top two will face off in the general election in November.

 

Filed Under: East County, News, Politics & Elections

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • …
  • 48
  • Next Page »
The Lemon Tree generic
RepublicServices-Antioch-ad (1)
Furn-Clrnc-Outlet-06-26B web
Monica's dinner 05-26 CCH
Celia's-07-26
Delta-RC-B 07-26
Deer-Valley-Chiro-06-22

Copyright © 2026 · · Contra Costa Herald · All Rights Reserved