Editorial: Brentwood Measure L, a Devil’s Advocate Approach to Limiting Growth

52

The passion over whether to amend Brentwood’s Urban Limit Line or not has brought out many emotions over the past few months that has divided a community in half.  But residents should really consider the consequences a “no” vote will have.

Regardless of all the rhetoric and comments online, Measure L comes down to who is going to develop the land, will it be Brentwood, or the city of Antioch. A “no vote” gives the city of Antioch the chance to annex the land.

To be blunt, Measure L has brought out the worst in the Brentwood community and everyone needs to take a deep breath, work to rebuild bridges with one another, and agree to disagree on the issue, and maybe taking a break from social media.

If approved, Measure L would annex 815 acres and with 555 acres for 2,400 homes which 80% is for senior housing, 225 acres would be permanently designated open space and could include agriculture and associated facilities.

The beauty of Measure L is that there are arguments for and against with neither side being completely right or wrong—but what is inexcusable in this process is the dishonesty going on and misrepresentation of facts. As a result, a judge had to step in and issue a judgement against statements made by Anti-Measure L supporters, who by the way, if they had formed a competing measure would not getting away with many of their statements under the law.

I urge the community to have an opinion and be passionate, but at least be accurate and truthful when arming others with facts and opinions.

Do I think Measure L will pass? It is unlikely, but I do encourage Brentwood voters to consider repercussions a “no” vote and its future impact

Consequences of a “no” vote includes:

  • Antioch could control what is built on the 815-acres, meaning its likely higher-density housing.
  • The border between Brentwood and Antioch now gets closer
  • Taking away $200 million in one-time building permit revenue
  • Losing out property tax and sales tax in perpetuity
  • The Fire District no longer would receive an additional $11 million
  • Road improvements on Balfour and American Avenue will not be built.

Like many Brentwood residents, I do not want more homes. But as a society we cannot have a NIMBY-like mentality. Just because you “got yours”, doesn’t mean the world stops. Just because you have property rights, doesn’t mean another landowner loses his.

Truth be told, the land is going to be sold. It will be developed. It is just a matter of when, how big, and how fast. Believing this 815-acres will stay open space forever, when it is already zoned residential, is both wishful thinking and ignorant.

It is time for Brentwood to step up and stop playing checkers and begin playing chess with that land realizing the real play is planning for the future because it is just a matter of time before shovels hit the dirt; houses will be built in either Brentwood or Antioch, you can’t stop the growth but you can control it.

It comes down to Brentwood maintaining control or allowing Antioch to reap the rewards.  This is an important decision, which is why I believe residents of Brentwood should take a devil’s advocate approach to Measure L before casting any vote.

This is much more complex than not wanting more houses built or more cars on the roadways. Here is a look at some of the talking points I’ve seen on social media that need to be clarified or addressed:

 

Blackhawk Nunn Is Not Going Away

The day after the election, should this measure fail in Brentwood, Blackhawk Nunn will be meeting with the City of Antioch. This property is zoned residential and is “development dirt” which makes it premium land and 10x to 20x more costly than if zoned “open space”. The land is too valuable to stay open space—development is coming which is why Brentwood should protect itself and forever control what is developed.

 

Antioch Doesn’t Want the Project – False!!!

I can confirm on good authority that both Antioch City Manager Ron Bernal and a majority of the council have interest in placing this on the 2020 ballot should Brentwood voters say “no”.

Those that claim Antioch doesn’t want the land either are trying to intentionally mislead voters or have no clue what they are talking about because it is rather foolish to think Antioch does not want this project.

To be blunt. Antioch is broke and this would represent a windfall of likely more than $200 million in building permit revenue, plus the property tax, sales tax, and job creation it creates—a very important project after losing Roddy Ranch and the shrinkage of the Ranch Project.

It’s absolutely moronic to think Antioch would reject taking advantage of the single largest economic project in our lifetime in East Contra Costa County.

In fact, the publisher of the Antioch Herald openly advocating Antioch should annex the land which would reverse what the Board of Supervisors did to Antioch in 2005—this came after years of planning in the 1990’s of future development in Antioch and Brentwood.

While I do not always agree with Mr. Payton, he is right:

“If Brentwood doesn’t want them, those are the kind of homes Antioch wants and needs for our housing mix, especially now that Roddy Ranch is permanent open space and the homes planned for the western Sand Creek area might never be built.”

Many of the claims on social media are inaccurate regarding Antioch voters stopping growth and protecting their Urban Limit Line – that is not true. The Ranch Project was always within Antioch City Limits. What happened in a complex scenario was the project size was reduced.  This claim Antioch voted on their urban limit line is false because residents don’t vote until the 2020 election on competing ballot measures which was basically a deal with Save Mount Diablo creating a win for all parties.

Furthermore, I hate to be the carrier of bad news for Brentwood residents, but Antioch will continue to build south along Hillcrest and Deer Valley until they hit the Antioch/Brentwood border. So really, Brentwood needs this project as a buffer between the two cities.

The question really becomes, does Brentwood want to preserve another 815 acres or do they want the Antioch border a stones throw away? Should Antioch take on the 815 acres, the reap all the benefits while Brentwood gets all the impacts—a very bad deal for Brentwood.

Bottom line, Brentwood passing on this project and relying on Antioch to say “no” is foolish.

What Brentwood residents should be doing is stop thinking short-term (Checkers), and think three to four moves down the road (Chess) and plan for smart growth, ensure you have a strong city council, a stickler for details planning commission and a solid city staff to ensure this project is built as promised where no funny business occurs.

 

More Open Space Than Anticipated

Something happened over the past few years. Wheeling and dealing by the East Bay Regional Park District, Save Mount Diablo and others have resulted in more than 1,500 acres of open space between Antioch and Brentwood.

Graphic by Save Mt. Diablo

With Measure L, this trend continues as they are providing another 225 acres of open space that would otherwise be developed—Save Mount Diablo knows this which is why they made a deal it did because it actually landlocked future development forever to the west and north. In total, this is more than 1700 acres both in Brentwood and Clayton.

As I stated above, the land will be sold at some point and development, Save Mount Diablo simply took the best deal it could get to preserve the most land.  Ultimately, with the north, west and east taken care of, Save Mount Diablo can now focus its time on limiting growth to the south of American Avenue behind Heritage High School—Save Mount Diablo decided to stop playing checkers and switch to chess and in the process made a check mate move in terms of preserving land.

Residents need to realize there is no more ability to move the Urban Limit Line to the West ever again.  People may be mad at Save Mount Diablo for supporting Measure L, but some are not seeing the big picture which is they basically created the new demarcation line south of Heritage High School—for that, just say thank you!

 

Infrastructure Improvements

What elected officials learn quickly is that road improvements are tied to development. The only way Balfour Road widening and extending American Avenue happens is with this project—or a similar one. A portion of Deer Valley Road will also be improved.   For folks in Shadow Lakes, this actually will solve a lot of their cut through traffic by the community based on gates and entry points of Measure L.

By expanding these roads, it will cut down on the head-on crashes on Balfour, reduce fatalities and make it safer for everyone. By making American Avenue a full loop, it will make the flow of traffic much improved instead of the nightmare it is now—which by the way, the loop gets completed before any houses are even built.

Remember, this property is zoned residential at 3 houses per acre for a reason because that is the only way improvements will occur on Balfour Road, Deer Valley Road and American Avenue.

 

Public Safety

The ECCFPD got a heck of a deal here. This was a no-brainer for them to sign on due to the revenue it creates.

Yes, the focus is clearly on what the MOU will provide the ECCFPD with $11 million in new revenue, including fulling staffing a station in new operating revenue each year, but this project has intangibles that are going overlooked.

Fatal Crash on Balfour Road on Aug 25. 2019

For starters, the infrastructure improvements will allow first responders to transport patients in and out of Brentwood on Balfour and Deer Valley—this will cut down on patient transport times, create smoother rides for patients in AMR units and free up AMR units faster making for a more streamlined EMS system.

This will reduce the amount of head on collisions with a wider road and a median installed. But what is not being shared is revenue from this project will also provide Brentwood Police with revenue it can use to plan for future growth—no one is talking about how this project could fund additional officers through its economic boon.

Again, should Antioch take this project, they would get $11 million towards public safety—Antioch won’t be foolish to turn that down as it gets Antioch Police Chief Tammany Brooks to his 124 officers while adding a 5th fire station through Contra Costa Fire.

 

Highway 4 & Road Impact

Yes, CHP offered a concern in the EIR, however, that was part of the process. Sadly, people have taken a concern and made it out as if the CHP has taken an opinion against Measure L—that is false and the sky is not falling.  The CHP has not taken a position, nor will they.

What CHP did do, and for good reason, was protect the community because now Blackhawk Nunn will now have to mitigate the risk in their final design and implementation—which creates a safer community. A safety precaution is far from a position.

Furthermore, the idea that Measure L will add 14,000 cars to the roadway is creative math. We are talking 2,400 homes of which 80% are seniors. Are you telling me these homes will have 6 cars for each house? Highly unlikely. With the housing being for seniors, it is safe to say these are not the commuters that hit Highway 4 each day for San Ramon, Walnut Creek, Oakland or San Francisco—this project has little impact on Highway 4.

 

Impact on Schools

With this being 80% senior housing, that is hardy going to impact schools. Meanwhile, the schools will receive tax revenue from the homes—essentially free money because if anyone actually studies their property tax bill, you would see K-12 schools and colleges get between 55% to 60% of your property taxes when you include all the bonds.

The impact on schools is minimal, maybe 300 students. Meanwhile, if this was an Antioch project with no restrictions and higher density because they could care less on the impact to Brentwood schools, you could be looking at more than 1,200 students entering Brentwood schools—a real impact and a huge problem.

That is not a scare tactic, just a reality.

 

Jobs

Claiming this project will not create new local jobs is both false and a lie. This will create many jobs for the construction trades, many who currently travel out of the area each day.  With a 20-year build out, it ensures they can work local and be close to their family.  In a study by John Muir, they have said that Measure L would create 200 new healthcare jobs in the area.  From a job creation standpoint, this is phenomenal.

These jobs then create a trickle-down effect to local shops and restaurants and becomes a form of a local economic stimulus plan. People complaining that we need jobs locally, here you go!

 

More Senior Housing is Needed

East County has the fastest growing senior population. We need more senior living opportunities and this project accomplishes that. The state has 1,000 per day turning 65 and this will be a huge issue in the coming years to ensure seniors can age with dignity as people are living longer while on a fixed income. Suggesting Brentwood already has enough senior living is both wrong and ignorant.

The community should want senior living because they shop local and service local business. By the way, Trilogy and Summerset are the highest priced per square foot on resale value in East County, this only adds to that.

 

Conclusion

I urge Brentwood voters to see the big picture, think about its future and protect itself with their vote. Measure L is about defense and protecting its Sphere of Influence as opposed to letting Antioch reap the benefits while pushing the impacts into Brentwood.

Rejecting $200 million in building permit revenues alone which doesn’t include property tax and sales tax revenue, improved fire service, improved roadways, and protecting more open space is exactly what Brentwood needs and should support—it’s a win for everyone.

Playing poker with Antioch voters and putting control in their hands is an option no one in Brentwood should ever want to see nor risk when you are already holding a winning hand.

Vote Yes.

 


Mike Burkholder
Publisher of ECT
[email protected]

 


 


52 COMMENTS

  1. All good points and fairly stated. Too bad the voters in Brentwood will likely not read this well written opinion. Maybe put a summary of all your points out on all of your social media outlets with links to this article so that the three sentence readers can quickly digest…

  2. The biggest anti-measure L people are the ones who don’t want to see houses in their backyards. It is fact they have lied, intimidated others and just using false facts to trick people. I agree with you, I do not want Antioch having any say of what goes on with this land.

    People of Brentwood can claim Antioch doesn’t want this project, but anyone who knows anything about how this works knows they will take all of 2 seconds to place it on the next ballot.

  3. Thank you for breaking down the pros and cons, this the information the community has needed for an informed decision.

  4. This can all be summarized in one line, don’t give Antioch the chance to annex the land and all that free money.

  5. LOL Did Blackhawk Nunn buy your opinion ECT? This is speculative at best Antioch would place this on the ballot.

        • Antioch is broke and by 2021-22 they are back to deficit spending. Within a 5-year period, they are at $12.56 million in deficit spending. Don’t believe me, go watch the June City Council meeting on the budget discussion. Or, pull up their budget. Both Joy Motts and Lori Ogorchock referenced this during the meeting.

          Even in a best case scenario with $7 million from cannabis and no housing crash, they still need to make up $5 million some how. So yes, they are broke.

          • Hey Loretta, you like facts? How about them facts Mike laid out for you? Antioch IS broke… and Antioch IS going to annex the land if Measure L fails… and then Brentwood will become Antioch…

        • next recession is right around the corner! 2020 or 2021 ..If Antioch isn’t broke, they soon will be

    • Far more than speculative. It will happen. Antioch looks great by saying nothing and letting this play out. And if Brentwood rejects it, it’s a huge windfall for antioch. Who will do it. It’s just not being publicized. Yet.

    • Exactly. How does Brentwood know so well what Antioch will or will not do? Maybe they should run for Antioch City Council. Antioch is more concerned about protecting open space than Brentwood is, THAT’S FOR SURE!! Look at all the negotiations and favorable outcome with Save Mount Diablo that Antioch has done. Has Brentwood??? NO ON MEASURE L!!! NO MORE NEW CONSTRUCTION HOMES!!! PERIOD!!!

  6. There is far too much BS in this piece to call out in a simple comment.
    I will simply compare and contrast 2 of his talking points

    I-He accuses the NO group of false and misleading statements but fails to provide the actual language
    Old statement:
    “school funding is allocated based on student attendance, so homes without students do not create any ongoing school revenue”

    Revised statement:
    “Brentwood’s state-mandated LCFF funding formula is based on school attendance. Homes without students won’t help with that.”

    You judge for yourself if the NO group was attempting to “lie” or if the language just needed clarification

    II-He argues against an official traffic study calling it “creative math”
    The reason he can’t do the math is because the traffic study is about daily trips on roadway segments, not cars per household.
    This is the finding in the traffic section of the EIR
    “Implementation of the Project would generate increased traffic volumes along study roadway segments. According to the transportation impact analysis (Fehr & Peers, April 2019), the
    Project would result in a total of 14,970 average daily trips” (Page 4.12-22 of EIR).

    How are these seniors (age 55+) expected to “shop local and service local business” if they aren’t driving to get there?

    It must be nice to run your own editorial because there are plenty of other factually incorrect items and insinuations based on half truths in this piece that don’t pass the smell test.

    Who is doing the lying to support their position again?

    Brentwood residents should read the researched items and not fall for the lies.

    The YES supporters are big on promises and short on documentation to back it up.

    Vote NO just like you did in Measure F in 2010 when the same threats of an Antioch boogeyman were made

  7. So in your OP-ED piece you quoted Allen Payton from the Contra Costa Herald. Have you even spoke with him. I did, yesterday(saturday afternoon at 1:30pm for 20 minutes). While he had a good point of widening J4 near Byron to bring another viable economic boosting corridor to East County, Vasco can not be widened and Highway 4 from EC to 242/680 is widened to capacity, adding more housing to what is already in the pipeline( in EC will be bad for this area. And in Allen Payton’s own words, ” I have not read the 193 page BN initiative”. How can you believe a publisher if he has not even read the proposal himself!
    Oh, by the way, NO ON L!

    • RP, or rather Ron,

      I rarely post comments on this website, but feel it necessary to respond, when someone, who tells me he had a good, respectful conversation with me about an issue, and hopes to have further discussion, then takes anonymous shots at me, here and elsewhere.

      If you will reread my commentary, you will see it is about providing the background facts and a historical perspective on this property and what has been happening with surrounding and nearby properties where the voters approved new home development, on the 35% of the land inside the county’s Urban Limit Line.

      It wasn’t necessary to read the 193 pages of details in the initiative to do that nor for someone to believe what I wrote, which comes from direct involvement as a former member of the Antioch City Council, Contra Costa Transportation Authority, Transplan, East Contra Costa Regional Fee & Financing Authority (for transportation) and State Route 4 Bypass Authority.

      Plus, if you will note I didn’t take a position for or against Measure L, just offered my opinion about what is possible based on how the people of Brentwood choose to vote.

      But, at least I know who you are, now and the disrespectful way you choose to debate and discuss an issue. Disappointing. Unfortunately, people who have been dealing with this issue were right when they’ve told me how nasty people who oppose Measure L are being in what they say, write and do in their attempts to defeat it.

      Like Mike wrote in his editorial, perhaps people need to back away a bit and take a breather. I’ll add show more respect when debating and discussing this and other issues, and don’t be cowardly hiding behind initials instead of providing your real name. This is America. You don’t have to be afraid of exercising your God-given, constitutionally protected freedom of speech.

      Allen Payton
      Publisher
      ContraCostaHerald.com
      Antioch Herald
      AntiochHerald.com

    • One more thing, Ron.

      Because I’m a Christian – and I just got out of church – I want you to know I forgive you for the things you’ve written and the approach you’ve taken in your completely unrelated, ad hominem attacks against me, which, by the way is the lowest form of debate, and is an indication you don’t have a strong argument to back up your position. Instead of debating an issue you attack the person with whom you disagree. That does nothing to further understanding and being willing to agree to disagree, or even finding common ground. It appears we did on the issue of regional transportation solutions and local economic development.

      And I’m still willing to have further discussion with you, if you agree to keep it to the issues and quit making things personal.

      Allen Payton

      • Allen,
        I do appreciate the chat we had yesterday afternoon, and I would like to keep the conversation between us moving forward.
        With an MOU between Brentwood and Antioch, that neither city will consider annexing or developing this land until 2022(per the 9212 report), I dont see that Antioch will be looking to develop that land anytime soon. Just stating the facts that I have from doing my due diligence in my research. You have some good ideas for East County, but saying Antioch will take this land, I believe is a scare tactic. This is not the right time to develop that property as we do not have the jobs that were promised for the economic vitality of East County. And Brentwood’s general plan proposal of 583 homes is a much better solution for that property. And thanks for calling out my full name. And in regards to my initials, I have posted on other issues and have used only my initials for past posts. It is in my profile for your info.
        Best regards,
        R P
        BY THE WAY, NO ON L!

  8. The senior housing thing is very important too because they have a closer community while maintaining independence. And once they leave their current homes, it allows for younger adults to then purchase them. Housing shortage is very real and I see this as a positive resolution.

    • EXACTLY, SENIOR HOUSING IS A PLOY! IT’S A BACK DOOR, NOT TOO CLEAVER WAY, TO GET APPROVAL AND BECOME REGULAR SINGLE FAMILY. IN MY OPINION! VOTE NO ON L!!!

  9. No on L, now and always. Brentwood has the cheapest real estate around already and this stupid initiative will drive it even lower.

    • Hmmm
      Your facts are not correct
      Today’s paper shows Brentwood has the highest average home price of all cities in east county according to today’s Contra Costa Times real estate section
      Probably because of senior projects like these that none of the other cities have
      But I understand your concerns

    • AGREED!!! MORE HOUSING MEANS LOWER PROPERTY VALUES. I’VE BEEN IN REAL ESTATE, RE ACCOUNTING MY ENTIRE CAREER AND I HAVE SEEN HOW OVER DEVELOPING HAS CREATED SLUMS, RICH DEVELOPERS AND LANDLORDS. VOTE NO ON L!!! AND KEEP YOUR HOME WORTH SOMETHING!!!

  10. Thank you for including the senior housing component. Kathy Griffin fails to acknowledge how this will help a growing senior housing shortage and suggests Brentwood seniors can move to Antioch. This is even on video. Why should seniors have to go to Antioch?

    Start at the 8 min mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuUBXbaAdWE&fbclid=IwAR22xA3eymKa0t0VKaknAGNP0T5eHJzVdNiTb5eitZuCMDQIkCDRBJ7c7bQ

    When you see the word NIMBY, a picture of her comes up. Brentwood should want senior housing because it is going to be the biggest need in the next 5-10 years. There is not enough affordable housing as it is, there is a reason why seniors are becoming the highest number of homeless. Its a combination of people living longer and a lack of affordable housing. Give seniors an option for smaller and affordable homes and free up the ones they are in for others to purchase.

    I am reading all these social media comments, people really do not understand Measure L and the consequences of a no vote. Sad.

    • I agree, No on L people are misleading. But worse, they are acting like bullies on social media. They have threatened people. Have basically called for a boycott of local business who are supporting Measure L. These people are the true definition of scare tactics and intimidation. Given the amount of crap they give people, surprised Mike even took a stance given the grenades he is going to get for this one.

      • There are a lot of people who support Measure L in the community, they simply are not speaking out publicly because they are terrorized and fear for their safety. Thank you ECT for this editorial and providing something fair for all to come to their own conclusion.

    • THE ONLY HOUSING SHORTAGE IN CALIFORNIA IS HOMELESS SHELTERS; DOES ANY DEVELOPER WANT TO BUILD ONE OF THOSE? AND IF SENIORS ARE HOMELESS, THEY SURE CAN’T AFFORD TO BUY ANYTHING IN BRENTWOOD!!! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, GET REAL PEOPLE!!

  11. ECT is 100% right. Antioch will take this in a heart beat. Those of you saying they won’t are a bunch if fools. If I was Brentwood, I would say yes. If I was Antioch I would also say yes. Too much at stake in the big scheme of things.

  12. Every argument by the anti-Measure L people seem like they are full of holes and half truths. I am voting yes. Like ECT, I want Antioch as far away from any decision that will impact Brentwood. For that reason alone, that is a big fat YES for me. There is a single line in this editorial that stood out for me, this is much bigger than more houses and cars. There is a lot of truth to that. Building is going to happen, its a matter of Antioch or Brentwood.

  13. I don’t understand the comment that this will lower existing property values. My understanding is this is designed to be similar to the Trilogy project that this same group developed. That is the most beautiful project in the area and has done nothing but increase our Brentwood property values. This project will do that’s again. But not if it goes to Antioch

  14. Brentwood has failed to communicate what this project actually does for the city. As Mike says, this is being built one way or the another. Is it going to be a Brentwood address or an Antioch address and who gets the money and who gets the impact. Both communities should be fighting their butts off to get it. 55+ community is what Brentwood should be begging for. You are going to attract people who have money, disposable income and will spend it in town. These are the type of projects that increase value for everyone and keep communities safe as you grow.

  15. I know, and have spoken to many Antioch residence, and have found nobody who wants Antioch to expand it’s boundary’s. While reading this article I find it interesting that it is sprinkled with only pictures of yes on L signs.

  16. Yes read this because it’s nothing but BS NO NO NO and dont be intimidated from Antioch getting this land also seniors will shop locally hmmm the Streets sure didnt survive this theory schools will not be funded traffic is horrible here the bypass has more horror stories and vasco road cannot be widened measure L has got to be voted down. I remember the general plan for brentwood in 1991 was the next Pleasanton another theory thrown out. Have you tried to drop your kids off at Adam’s and heritage it’s a complete nightmare . People purchased out here for its uniqueness not for it to be another concord or walnut creek. Please dont allow Brentwood to take this
    from us and do not believe these publishers. If we vote on our brentwood congress correctly brentwood can be ran by our community not by developers

    • EXACTLY!!! VOTE NO ON L. DON’T FALL AGAIN FOR PROMISES THAT NEVER COME TRUE. DEVELOPERS LOVE TO DANGLE THE BIG MONEY CARROT, DON’T TAKE THE BAIT FOR ONCE IN YOUR LIFE!

  17. Im in law enforcement and Im NO on L. This development is only bringing more problems. I attended Heritage ten years ago. At that time the surrounding neighborhoods were pristine. Ten years later look at Shadow Lakes and Deer Ridge…..its trash. Ten years later Heritage and Adams Middle school have portable classrooms. Let Antioch have it. Let them deal with the future problems. My generation has enough problems as it is. By the time problems start to rise most of you will have dementia. Vote NO on L!

    • You may be law enforcement (no name/badge/agency) but retired Brentwood Police Chief Mark Evenson, is on the Yes for L campaign. You don’t even understand who is attending school where.

      Brentwood’s schools will receive millions in revenue and very few students from this 80% senior community. It generates approximately 83 high school students at full build out. If the land becomes non-senior housing in Antioch, over 1,400 new students would attend Brentwood schools and rush-hour traffic would be significantly worse than with the Measure L plan.

      Full list of endorsements can be viewed here https://www.yesonlforbrentwood.org/endorsements

  18. Antioch has significant revenue problems, especially for Police. I would be shocked if Antioch doesn’t jump at the opportunity. Apparently Mike spoke to many in high positions in Antioch govt and they said as
    Much

  19. This editorial gives a huge pass to the GBN folks who have orchestrated with financial muscle what they could not get in the way of community support. The writer raises important questions but seeminly has no doubt about what will happen next (Antioch absorbs the property and builds out as GBN desires). If anything seems apparent, it is that the voters in Antioch and Brentwood are worried about their quality of life issues (traffic, public safety, schools, etc) and they don’t trust developers for historical reasons. The ad campaign contrived by GBN has clearly struck a nerve with exaggerations and deceptive claims that make trusting them nearly impossible. It would have been nice if they had proposed to do what was called for in the general plan. Don’t be surprised if Measure L is a Loser in Brentwood and dies on the vine in Antioch too.

  20. This area will be developed one way or the other. It’s just a matter of time. I disagree with ECT that the fire district got a good deal. They didn’t. Roads have not got a good deal, and police too. The real problem is roads. Vasco and J4 are at their limits. This should be of major concern and dealt with BEFORE any more housing is approved. Especially of this magnitude. The entire east end of the county is suffering from road blocks and long commutes. Face it, there are not enough good jobs in EC. The roads need to be addressed first before any more large developments are approved. Smog, trash, and substandard roads are killing our wildlife and people. Whatever happens fix the infrastructure first !!!

    • So without development how do you pay for multi-million dollar infrastructure projects? As for fire (ECCFPD) the local community has voted down tax increases to support Fire response times 4 times now. Low impact projects similar to Trilogy and Summerset seem wise???

      • Robert, your missing my point. The developers have tons of cash. The infrastructure for mitigation should come first. An example would be to build the fire station first not after 600 homes are built. Widen Balfour and Vasco before homes are occupied. Developers play the poor boy game and float the sales money for months or even years. See Summerlakes, see Mt House, and others that have delayed mitigation only to lower the quality of life for those who are already here while enriching themselves. Development does have its place when it is fair for the already invested community. We should not suffer.

  21. I just received an email blast from Kathy Griffin and no on L
    I guess this op/ed got to them as she goes in detail how Antioch will have no interest in this property if Messure L fails. I’m sure the Antioch City fathers are thrilled that a Brentwood resident is telling them what they will do! No one truly knows what Antioch will decide in that case, we have opinions, best guesses, hunched, beliefs. But apparently Kathy Griffin knows for a fact. So disingenuous and manipulative. I was wavering how to vote until I got the email. Her dishonesty along with the aggressive behavior of The No on L’s (won’t support local business who support L etc) has pushed me to a Yes.
    Ballot just signed sealed and going out in the morning mail

  22. Interesting article. I had assumed that the land was in Brentwood area so if the residents voted No on L the land would just stay as it is. I didn’t realize it could be moved to a different city.

    Also, if I calculated correctly 20% would be appx. 480 non-senior homes. In previous comments someone mentioned that would create 83 high school students, but how many students K-12?

    • Is he respected because he gives you an opinion you like on this issue because everyone knows he is not very well respected and many people dislike the garbage he puts out. For starters, this isn’t even about urban sprawl, its been in the pipe for many years. Easy for Dan to say no, he likes the view while riding his bike. You can thank him for the lies he published about the fire department and the damage he has done.

      Dan lied in this piece claiming the developer can come back later and change the housing and age restriction, Save Mount Diablo put those protections in. Someone should ask Dan what he thinks smart growth is? 3-4 story buildings? We don’t need Carol Lane apartments or Sycamore Hood projects. Why is it Brentwoods job to provide jobs for Pittsburg, Antioch and Oakley? Perhaps Dan should stick to Measure L instead of making irrelevant arguments because one could argue that by building homes the next 20 years it does create construction jobs and we will have more hospital jobs in town while stimulating the local economy. Someone should also tell Dan that other environmental groups are not even local, anytime you mention urban limit line they are an automatic no. Save Mount Diablo is local and understands local land preservation. Another useless opinion by Dan full of holes. Maybe he should ride his bike out here and really observe it before spreading more lies like he did with the fire department.

Comments are closed.