CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Special Meeting September 16, 2025
7:00 P.M. Council Chambers
6:00 P.M. – SPECIAL MEETING/STUDY SESSION
Mayor Pro Tem Rocha called the Closed Session to order at 6:00 P.M., and Acting City Clerk Garcia called the roll.
Present: Council Members District 1 Torres-Walker, District 3 Freitas, District 4 Wilson, and Mayor Pro Tem (District 2) Rocha
Absent: Mayor Bernal (arrived at 6:03 P.M.)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Bernal led the Pledge of Allegiance.
STUDY SESSION
SM-1. CONTINUED STUDY SESSION REGARDING THE POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF AN
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING ORDINANCE (IHO)
Interim Director of Community & Economic Development Storer/ Planning Manager Merideth presented the staff report dated September 16, 2025, recommending the City Council provide direction regarding the IHO and direct staff to prepare a draft ordinance for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council.
Devin Williams representing a Coalition of Organizations representing Antioch Community Members, Tenants, Workers, Service Providers, Housing Developers, Faith Leaders and Policy Experts, thanked the City Council for holding this Study Session and spoke in support of the IHO. He provided the following policy recommendations: a b ase inclusionary rate of at least 20% units targeted to very low and extremely low-income residents , i n-lieu fee option at an appropriate rate , incentives tied directly to affordabi lity and public benefit and a ffordability in perpetuity.
In response to Councilmember Freitas, Planning Manager Merideth and Interim Director of Community & Economic Development Storer gave an overview of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Policy compliance requirements and explained how they tied into transportation funding.
Interim Director of Community & Economic Development Storer also provided additional information on possible legislation tied to transit centers.
In response to Mayor Bernal, Planning Manager Merideth clarified that MTC guidelines indicated that any policy or ordinances had to apply in all Transit Oriented Community (TOC) areas but
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting
September 16, 2025 Page 2 of 3
jurisdiction.
Interim Director of Community & Economic Development Storer explained that this ordinance would not apply to developments with maps that had been previously approved.
Following discussion, Council requested staff provide the following information:
• Verify if phase 3 of the Richland Development was vested • Housing Element Update Annual Report
• Staffing Analysis from the May 2025 IHO staff report
• In-lieu fees from other jurisdictions
Staff requested direction on the following policy points:
1. Should staff move forward with preparation of an IHO? Council consensus moved discussion of Item 1 until after the remaining items were discussed.
2. Should the IHO apply to rental projects, for-sale projects, or both? Council consensus supported the staff recommendation for both project types.
3. What inclusionary requirement should the IHO include? Council consensus supported a 15% total inclusionary requirement, and this should apply to rental and for-sale projects (this item may be adjusted following further analysis).
4. Should the IHO include specific income category breakdowns – for example 5% VLI, 5% LI, 5% MI – or should the developer be able to choose any affordability or combination of affordabilities? Other breakdowns could be 5% ELI, and 10% VLI or 5% ELI, 5% VLI & 5% LI or 3% ELI, 7% VLI & 5% LI, etc.
Council directed staff to provide an analysis to match the needs of the City.
5. Should rental housing and for sale housing have different inclusionary requirements or the same inclusionary requirements?
Council consensus supported all housing types maintain the same inclusionary requirements.
6. What should the threshold project size be to be included in the IHO? Council consensus supported the MTC TOC Policy stating that an ordinance may exempt projects with fewer than 11 units.
7. Should the units be affordable in perpetuity?
jurisdictions may choose to apply policy beyond the TOC area including the entirety of a
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting
September 16, 2025 Page 3 of 3
8. Should an in-lieu fee option be included as an alternative means? And should other alternative means be included?
Council consensus supported an in-lieu fee option.
9. Should the ordinance encourage on-site construction? If so, then by what means? Council consensus supported encouraging on-site construction by requiring a higher inclusionary ordinance requirement when a developer pays the in-lieu fee.
10. Should there be developer incentives, beyond State Density Bonus Law? If so, by what means?
Council consensus supported waivers and fee deferrals. Staff was directed to provide Council with a list of options.
1. Should staff move forward with preparation of an IHO? Council consensus supported moving forward with preparation of an IHO.
An additional request from the City Council included:
• IH units shall have the same interior finishes
• Provide Council with a copy of the consultant’s contract.
Next Steps
Interim Director of Community & Economic Development Storer announced they would re- engage with the consultant, prepare a draft Ordinance to take to the Planning Commission based on feedback provided this evening and begin the public hearing process.
ADJOURNMENT
On motion by Councilmember Wilson, seconded by Councilmember Rocha, the City Council unanimously adjourned the meeting at 7:22 P.M.
Respectfully submitted:
Kitty Eiden
KITTY EIDEN, Minutes Clerk
Council consensus supported the units be affordable in perpetuity.