City Council Approves A.N.T. Property Cleanup, Rent Collection
Jun 26, 2025 10:08AM ● By John McCallum
The photo above shows pallets in various conditions and barrels of unknown liquid substances lying around the former A.N.T. Pallet property owned by the city at Walnut Avenue and West Stockton Boulevard. The City Council passed a resolution dedicating up to $250,000 to clean up the property as well as pursuing back rent from the company through collections. Photo courtesy of the City of Galt.
GALT, CA (MPG) - Galt City Council voted unanimously at its June 17 meeting to provide funding for cleanup of the former A.N.T. Pallet site at the corner of Walnut Avenue and West Stockton Boulevard.
As part of the resolution authorizing the funding, the council elected not to pursue legal action against the former occupant to collect back rent and removed a provision to write off the uncollectable amount, inserting language to use the collections process to try to recoup what is owed.
The council modified resolution cleanup language to specify spending “up to” $250,000 on restoring the property to a useful purpose. The money comes out of the lease revenue fund paid by A.N.T., which has a current balance of $372,972.
The council also removed language authorizing staff to write off $126,000 in uncollectible revenue from the property and added language directing staff to pursue recovery of that amount through the collections process, a motion made by Councilmember Tim Reed.
Councilmember Bonnie Rodriguez made the request to address cleanup language in the resolution and provide for public comment from a resident who emailed her with concerns.
Galt resident Harry Wensel said that the issue came down to a “half-million-dollar question” of whether the city would pursue action to recoup money owed city residents. He based his estimate on the cleanup amount, the uncollected revenue and another $113,100 listed in the staff report as “daily damages from expiration of the lease on Dec. 31, 2024.”
“I don’t think it’s the time to say we’re not going to pursue that,” Wensel said. “I think it’s the time to get back to court and I think it’s time to get judgements and get those in place.”
Mayor Shawn Farmer said the proposal to lease to A.N.T. came from a former city department head and was opposed by several current officials. No one on the current City Council was involved in the decision, he added.
The city acquired the five parcels, 7.65 acres, in 2017 as part of a future Walnut Avenue interchange with U.S. Highway 99. With construction several years off, the city hoped for revenue to assist with the project through extending a lease to A.N.T. in April 2018.
Beginning in summer 2024, A.N.T. stopped paying rent and was legally evicted from the property this past May, leaving uncollected rent and also what is described by the city as a property in “a very poor, unsafe condition and a fire and safety hazard.”
Three buildings on site might contain asbestos and/or lead-based paint, with barrels, some empty and some containing an unknown liquid substance, lying around along with pallets in various condition.
Public Works Director John Griffin said one stack of pallets measures 120 feet by 180 feet and 10 feet high, taking up half of a two-acre parcel. He told council that the $250,000 for cleanup was a staff estimate and the city would get bids to firm up the number needed to do the work, adding staff had already removed more than 1,700 pallets from the property, along with other materials.
Wensel urged the council to pursue legal action against A.N.T. not only to recoup the funding, which would also include potentially collecting attorney fees, but also to send a message to other businesses with city contracts that “you don’t do things like this.”
“Half a million dollars,” Wensel added. “Think about what we can do with that.”
Several council members had questions about the resolution’s write-off proposal and asked about the potential of seeking relief through the courts. In the analysis, Griffin wrote that the city could seek additional relief through the courts to collect back rent, damages, costs and attorneys’ fees.
Griffin and Interim City Attorney Frank Splendorio told the council that it had been difficult to connect with A.N.T. during the process of first getting the company to comply with its contract.
Griffin said that three to four breach of contract notices were sent prior to beginning the eviction process. Splendorio added that some came back as undeliverable, so the city had to track down the company’s new address to ensure they had been received.
Griffin said that three to four breach of contract notices were sent prior to beginning the eviction process. Splendorio added that some came back as undeliverable, so the city had to track down the company’s new address to ensure they had been received.
Rodriguez said even if relief was granted, the company could declare bankruptcy to get out from under any orders and resurface with a new name.
Farmer noted the city had already collected more than $372,000 from A.N.T. and that $250,000 of that would be used to clean up the property, leaving the city with more than $122,000 in revenue from the lease. While “not a lot,” he added, the back money owed wasn’t actually money the city had lost since it was never collected.
“It would have been the same if the property sat vacant all this time,” Farmer said. He added that if the city chose legal action, even if it won, it might not collect what a court determined it was owed anyway and would subsequently have spent real taxpayer money on the legal process.
In the end, the council approved the revised resolution 5-0.
